Ok st and TTech

[bringmagicback]

Uniform Haters: Please take the below survey and get back to me.

True or False

Alternate Uniforms Excite Current Players?


Alternate Uniforms Help In Recruiting?


Alternate Uniforms Bring Attention To The Program?


Alternate Uniforms Overall Have A Positive Effect On The Football Program?

 

[VeloClone]

And it comes out. Nice hostility. I didn't say a single bad thing about OSU, and you have to put us down. "Ketchup and mustard?" What a stupid insult.

I think I see a lot more correlation between the funding of your football program from your primary benefactor and it's impact on your W/L than I do on uniforms. Your Taj Mahal facilities are what jump started your rise. But keep thinking is the ugly-as-**** uniforms.

Klamath, don't be such a fuddy duddy. You clearly overestimate the impact of T. Boone's $265M athletic department gift and underestimate the impact of football uniforms.

 

[VeloClone]

Is it really necessary that both the threads about this game deteriorate into ******* matches over alternate uniforms?

 

[Cychedelia]

Uniform Haters: Please take the below survey and get back to me.

True or False

Alternate Uniforms Excite Current Players? Yes


Alternate Uniforms Help In Recruiting? No


Alternate Uniforms Bring Attention To The Program? No


Alternate Uniforms Overall Have A Positive Effect On The Football Program? No

Thanks.

 

[ahaselhu]

agreed, we must protect our brand at all costs!!!!!!!! Cant lose all of our illustrious history at the whim of giving kids what they want!

You have a point that we don't really have a recognizable brand to protect (and I don't think Oklahoma State does either), so I'd have no problem with us having special alternative uniforms each year, regardless of how awful they may be.

However, the impact of special alternate uniforms is negligible. You might get a few mentions from sports journalists about it, but the affect on name recognition would still be very small compared to appearing in the rankings. If you go all in like Oregon, there MAY be a noticeable affect, but I really doubt it.

Name recognition/history, facilities, coaching staff relationships, and ability to send players to the NFL all rank higher to the vast majority of potential recruits, and I don't think it is even arguable. Uniforms might make the difference between two otherwise equal choices, but it's not going to get your foot in the door with many, if any, recruits.

 

[bringmagicback]

Thanks.

Alternate uniforms dont excite recruits? Is that why every school (every school) has displays of all of their uniforms that they pass during recruiting visits? They dont bring attention? Was everyone talking about maryland football last year for what reason? Are we not talking about oklahoma state and ttech for that exact reason in this exact thread. Stupid post is stupid.

 

[Cychedelia]

Alternate uniforms dont excite recruits? Is that why every school (every school) has displays of all of their uniforms that they pass during recruiting visits? They dont bring attention? Was everyone talking about maryland football last year for what reason? Are we not talking about oklahoma state and ttech for that exact reason in this exact thread. Stupid post is stupid.

I agree, your post is pretty stupid.

 

[VeloClone]

Alternate uniforms dont excite recruits? Is that why every school (every school) has displays of all of their uniforms that they pass during recruiting visits? They dont bring attention? Was everyone talking about maryland football last year for what reason? Are we not talking about oklahoma state and ttech for that exact reason in this exact thread. Stupid post is stupid.

There is a misconception that any publicity is good publicity. Iowa State got publicity from being punked by NDSU, however that didn't do anything to advance the program.

 

[SimpsonClone]

You have a point that we don't really have a recognizable brand to protect (and I don't think Oklahoma State does either), so I'd have no problem with us having special alternative uniforms each year, regardless of how awful they may be.

However, the impact of special alternate uniforms is negligible. You might get a few mentions from sports journalists about it, but the affect on name recognition would still be very small compared to appearing in the rankings. If you go all in like Oregon, there MAY be a noticeable affect, but I really doubt it.

Name recognition/history, facilities, coaching staff relationships, and ability to send players to the NFL all rank higher to the vast majority of potential recruits, and I don't think it is even arguable. Uniforms might make the difference between two otherwise equal choices, but it's not going to get your foot in the door with many, if any, recruits.

This post says it all. I completely agree with you. I swear some of you think that changing uniforms is going to turn our program around because we look cooler. Will it hurt? No probably not, but it also isn't going to win us better recruits. Program history, coaches, program success, and players in nfl from the institution win recruits. Our SEZ project will have more effect on potential recruits than uniforms. Does it mean that we shouldn't consider having an alternative uniform? No, I like the idea of having an alternate uniform. But let's be realistic about what it is really accomplishing.

 

[CyLoboClone]

I love our new mark and I love that we are sticking with it. I also like that we have different options for pant and jersey combos. However, it seems like we are the sisters of the poor sometimes when we have one helmet color and less options than other teams.

I had a daydream yesterday of a chromed face mask covering a gold like ironman with the I state logo done in ironman maroon and gold all on a chromed maroon. Jersey and pants in same scheme.

Oh well.

 

[bigdaddykane]

Wow those uniforms are ugly.

okie state were ugly, techs were cool

 

[SouthTulsaPoke]

Really?

Please keep posting. It is a tough Friday and I can use the laughs.

You have a fantastic grasp of causality.

I read the local media. I've been searching for the story, that has rolled to archives, so I'm having trouble finding it, but there is a story on how OSU has become the "cool" out-of-state college destination for high school graduates in the DFW Metroplex. One of the reasons cited was the image that OSU is projecting through it's branding, which included the success of the football team and it's stylish uniforms.

In fact, the #6 RB, Ronald Jones II, is from McKinney, Tx. Two of the reasons he cited for choosing OSU over offers from Alabama, Clemson, Auburn, Miami, Michigan, Arizona State, et. al., is OSU's proximity to his home town, and the fact that his sister had already chosen to attend OSU. His sister is one of the students from the DFW area that I'm citing.

People like you, that want to cite causality when discussing the impact of branding, advertising and marketing in general, are one of the great burdens that a marketing professional has to deal with on a weekly basis. That quant jocks don't buy it, unless you run a regression analysis to show a correlation coefficient indicating causality. I'm having a discussion on a sports board, not trying to prove correlation.

But there's a famous dictum in advertising that says, "Scientific research proves that only 50% of dollars spent on advertising works. The problem is, you don't know which 50%!

But by all means, keep your football program in the 1990's and embrace your limited traditions, because your results on the field are specific and measurable over time, and ISU isn't doing so hot.

How do I know? I read your board and hear your tradition loving fan base complaining about the various causal effects that are keeping you out of bowls, and have you being passed by the likes of Baylor and Oklahoma State.

 

[SouthTulsaPoke]

And it comes out. Nice hostility. I didn't say a single bad thing about OSU, and you have to put us down. "Ketchup and mustard?" What a stupid insult.

I think I see a lot more correlation between the funding of your football program from your primary benefactor and it's impact on your W/L than I do on uniforms. Your Taj Mahal facilities are what jump started your rise. But keep thinking is the ugly-as-**** uniforms.

Not hostile. I've heard ISU fans refer to them as Ketchup and Mustard. I find it no more hostile than when you guys refer to us as Okie Lite, which is insulting on two levels.

Also note, that I am responding to a very ludicrous assertion that schools that spend money on new and cool (as defined by 18-22 year olds playing the game) uniforms are damaging a university's brand. The generosity of our donors (including, but not limited to Boone Pickens and Sherman E. Smith) have had the largest impact on our athletic program's turn-around. However, the facilities are just a part of our overall strategy to achieve success on the field, court and diamond. Our uniforms also play a large part in this. Not the only part, not the largest part, but a significant part.

I'm already on record on this forum regarding the importance of facility improvements. Read here. I have a complete grasp of this issue, from both a professional and personal stand point.

 

[VeloClone]

I read the local media. I've been searching for the story, that has rolled to archives, so I'm having trouble finding it, but there is a story on how OSU has become the "cool" out-of-state college destination for high school graduates in the DFW Metroplex. One of the reasons cited was the image that OSU is projecting through it's branding, which included the success of the football team and it's stylish uniforms.

In fact, the #6 RB, Ronald Jones II, is from McKinney, Tx. Two of the reasons he cited for choosing OSU over offers from Alabama, Clemson, Auburn, Miami, Michigan, Arizona State, et. al., is OSU's proximity to his home town, and the fact that his sister had already chosen to attend OSU. His sister is one of the students from the DFW area that I'm citing.

People like you, that want to cite causality when discussing the impact of branding, advertising and marketing in general, are one of the great burdens that a marketing professional has to deal with on a weekly basis. That quant jocks don't buy it, unless you run a regression analysis to show a correlation coefficient indicating causality. I'm having a discussion on a sports board, not trying to prove correlation.

But there's a famous dictum in advertising that says, "Scientific research proves that only 50% of dollars spent on advertising works. The problem is, you don't know which 50%!

But by all means, keep your football program in the 1990's and embrace your limited traditions, because your results on the field are specific and measurable over time, and ISU isn't doing so hot.

How do I know? I read your board and hear your tradition loving fan base complaining about the various causal effects that are keeping you out of bowls, and have you being passed by the likes of Baylor and Oklahoma State.

Not hostile. I've heard ISU fans refer to them as Ketchup and Mustard. I find it no more hostile than when you guys refer to us as Okie Lite, which is insulting on two levels.

Also note, that I am responding to a very ludicrous assertion that schools that spend money on new and cool (as defined by 18-22 year olds playing the game) uniforms are damaging a university's brand. The generosity of our donors (including, but not limited to Boone Pickens and Sherman E. Smith) have had the largest impact on our athletic program's turn-around. However, the facilities are just a part of our overall strategy to achieve success on the field, court and diamond. Our uniforms also play a large part in this. Not the only part, not the largest part, but a significant part.

I'm already on record on this forum regarding the importance of facility improvements. Read here. I have a complete grasp of this issue, from both a professional and personal stand point.

U mad?

 

[CyFan61]

I am a marketing analyst by trade and training. We are risking NOTHING to our brand. In fact, for the past two years, we have been marketing ourselves as "America's Brightest Orange!"

Adapt or die, ISU.

ISU's brand stands to gain or lose nothing by adding crazy uniform combinations. It isn't a world in which not doing it will "kill" you, as you suggest with no support.

 

[CyFan61]

People like you, that want to cite causality when discussing the impact of branding, advertising and marketing in general, are one of the great burdens that a marketing professional has to deal with on a weekly basis. That quant jocks don't buy it, unless you run a regression analysis to show a correlation coefficient indicating causality. I'm having a discussion on a sports board, not trying to prove correlation.

But there's a famous dictum in advertising that says, "Scientific research proves that only 50% of dollars spent on advertising works. The problem is, you don't know which 50%!

But by all means, keep your football program in the 1990's and embrace your limited traditions, because your results on the field are specific and measurable over time, and ISU isn't doing so hot.

How do I know? I read your board and hear your tradition loving fan base complaining about the various causal effects that are keeping you out of bowls, and have you being passed by the likes of Baylor and Oklahoma State.

Your argument is basically "You're an idiot because you want evidence, but evidence is really hard to find, so stop being an idiot and just take me at my word."

 

[SouthTulsaPoke]

SouthTulsaPoke just won an award, for what I'm not sure. Probably being a moron.

ESPN disagrees.

"You look at the history of Oregon football, and we have a spirit of innovation," Helfrich said. "It's something we pride ourselves on that started in the early '90s. [Uniforms] are how we got in the door at all. And now we're able to compete a little bit differently nationally with recruits, and we can at least get in the door. But more and more, it just puts you in front of some different people."
Other schools have taken notice.


Looking to revitalize its program under Randy Edsall, Maryland drew a lot of national attention for its "Pride" uniforms from Under Armour that incorporated the Terps' red and black and Maryland state-flag colors. At Oklahoma State, the Cowboys wore six different Nike uniform combinations in 2010 and 13 combinations in 2011 and 2012. During that same period, OSU landed recruiting classes that finished in the top 30 twice.
"You drive down a highway and you look at a billboard and it says, 'you just looked at this billboard, you should use it as advertisement' -- it's the same philosophy as uniforms," Oklahoma State coach Mike Gundy said. "It's a marketing tool. It grabs the attention of the young men we're recruiting."

But as any good advertiser will tell you, it doesn't matter how shiny the package is if you can't get somebody to buy the product. ESPN.com surveyed more than 700 high school recruits from the classes of 2014 and 2015 -- including 90 who self-identified as a member of the ESPN 300 for the Classes of 2014 or 2015 -- and asked them where uniforms ranked in their college decision. Uniforms were the top factor for only 3 percent of players, and uniforms ranked eighth on the list of criteria behind academics, coaching, playing time, school tradition, location, experience sending players to the NFL and television exposure.

So here's a question. Of the criteria listed above uniforms, which can you affordably change by next season.

If you CAN see some improvement in recruiting by changing uniforms, and your tradition ain't all that in the eyes of a recruit, why wouldn't you? Because the old farts might complain?

And don't say it's tradition, because when a recruit talks tradition, he's not talking about the chants the crowd recites, or the history of the stadium, or the Heisman Trophy winner you almost had thirty years ago. He's talking about win-loss records and what bowls have you gone to during HIS lifetime.

Yes...we sell Barry Sanders and Thurman Thomas to RB recruits, but the candidates at every other position don't care a rat's...

We sell Dez and Blackmon to WRs. We sell Super Bowl rings and first round draft picks. But when it comes down to it, we have very little control over that.

Uniforms we CAN control, and we'll use it every time we're in a head-to-head competition with Iowa State for recruit, and that one inexpensive difference will more times than not, tip the balance to OSU.

 

[SouthTulsaPoke]

Your argument is basically "You're an idiot because you want evidence, but evidence is really hard to find, so stop being an idiot and just take me at my word."

So what are you...an engineer or an accountant?

 

[SouthTulsaPoke]

U mad?

Nope...just like the lively discussion.

U mad?

 

[SouthTulsaPoke]

ISU's brand stands to gain or lose nothing by adding crazy uniform combinations. It isn't a world in which not doing it will "kill" you, as you suggest with no support.

Hey...as a rival fan in the same conference, I'm perfectly content with you sticking with those uniforms. Just don't trash on those of us that are taking a pro-active approach to radically making our sports programs more successful.

We made a commitment to change our image in 2005 when Mike Holder convinced Boone Pickens to invest in his vision. Since that time, OSU is 80-39 in football alone, while ISU is 44-70.

In the ten seasons prior to 2005 and our re-commitment to excellence, OSU's football record was 58-59, while ISU was 46-71 (2 more wins and one less loss).

Doing the same thing doesn't seem to be working out for you guys.