The Indiana men’s hoops team tweeted a photo of this year’s squad last night. It contains a really subtle uni glitch. Can you spot it?
While you’re looking, I’ll note that there are at least 44 Adidas logos visible in that photo, which is fucking nuts!
I’ll also mention that I heartily approve of the portrait’s symmetry, although I think it would’ve been better if No. 21 and No. 4 in the back row had swapped places.
Okay, that’s enough stalling. Did you spot the uni anomaly?
Answer: No. 53 and No. 22 — the two guys at the right end of the front row — are wearing different uniforms than everyone else.
It’s easier to see the differences if we zoom in on No. 3 (conventional uni) and No. 53 (aberrant uni):
I see three differences:
- The striped collar/armhole trim: For No. 3, the double red stripes are the same width; for No. 53, there’s one thick red stripe and one thinner red stripe. (This may also be the case on the shorts, but it’s hard to be sure.)
- The “Indiana” lettering: The two fonts don’t match (look at the “A”), and No. 53’s letters are clearly more vertical.
- The numeral “3”: Again, the fonts don’t match.
The version worn by No. 3 (and almost all the other players in the photo) is what the team wore last season. As for the other version — the one worn by the two guys at the right end of the front row — I don’t follow the IU hoops team enough to know if it’s from a previous season, or a throwback, or what. Anyone know more?
In any case, it’s interesting that two guys wore a slightly different uniform for the team portrait — and that those two guys happened to be sitting next to each other!
Update: Several people have informed me that the two outliers are wearing a recent throwback uni.
(Kudos to Patrick Felts for spotting this one, and to @iufbcommenter for bringing Felts’s observation to my attention.)
When I zoomed in on the picture, to varying degrees of clarity, I counted 55 logos. The one on the basketball grinds my gears the most.
I first noticed the 5 didn’t match the others. Didn’t see the rest of the differences on my own.
22 also looks like the only one without adidas logo on socks
I have a sudden urge to go buy all of the Adidas things now, and I have no idea why.
I guess team photos have to be sponsored now as well (Indiana University Credit Union).
– The word “Indiana” rides too low on all the jerseys.
– The gap between “Indiana” and the player number is much too wide, save for players #22 and #53, where it looks appropriate.
For all the hell that Nike catches on this site, the fit, style, fonts, and overall appearance of their uniforms is almost always vastly superior to anything Adidas produces.
Also, how many college or NBA basketball rosters could start a staring five with numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5? Of course international could. Too bad it appears that these players positions don’t coincide with these numbers (1 PG, 2 SG, 3 SF, 4 PF, 5 C). Also, they have 6 players numbers (0,1,2,3,4,5) that are sequential.
Those huge Adidas badges on the collars look so out of place. Even worse than the Nike collars on the new jersey template.
To me, they make everyone look like they are wearing a bib. It’s bad.
The different jerseys are throwbacks (either for 1981 or 1987) that were worn last year for a few games (they started a win streak in them and didn’t change back until they lost),
Thanks!
Mood, you beat me to the answer by 20 minutes! For what it’s worth, the two players wearing the throwback jerseys, Jackson Creel (22) and Jordan Rayford (53) are the two newest members of the team. They’re both walk-ons who were announced a few weeks ago. Maybe that’s why they didn’t have the standard uniforms yet?
That seems likely. I know at UNC they have historically had more walk-ons in the preseason and haven’t ordered the game jerseys with names until they’ve decided who is on the final roster. So these guys may not have the final/ official jerseys yet, and I’ll bet the ones they’re wearing are NNOB.
One thing I can appreciate about the two outliers’ uniforms is how the wordmark is proportioned to the larger size jerseys they’re wearing. One of the frustrating things about being a bigger guy is when I buy official jerseys or merch in my size 3XL the wordmarks and/or logos are the same size as they put on size small shirts so I end up with a wordmark/logo that looks so much smaller against all the extra empty space my voluminous 3XL shirt provides. I do wish manufacturers could correct this proportionality issue especially since they tend to charge more for these larger sizes.
You saw three differences but missed the only one that slapped me in the face:
53 and 22 have significantly bigger INDIANAs than anyone else.
I just lumped that in with the different font.
Fair enough.
I noticed the different size font (height & thickness) INDIANA.
The larger bolder font look significantly better than the regular jersey. The small font leaves too much space between the school name & the front number. Very visible on single #s centered low below the arch. Which an earlier commenter mentioned they have 6 single digits (a trend I find annoying btw)
This brings up a question. Whenever I see a team photo, the team is all dressed in the same unis. Have there been any team photos that scattered all their looks into the photo? Put some players dressed in their homes, some in aways, some in alternates, some in throwbacks, etc. Mix them all in for a distribution of colors.
The only one I can think of were the early 1970s Oakland A’s
link
link
link
and cetera
The 2s and the 5s are the same except for number 53. That 5 has a different style.
I do like the traditional way of posing of the Hoosiers. In German soccer up until a few years ago the team photo would always include one or two medical suitcases with sponsor names on it plus the manager wearing ads on a dress shirt or polo shirt collar which I always found over the top hilarious.
Am I the only idiot who stared at the picture of the guy on his computer on the homepage for 30 seconds?
I also stared at that picture….