Oregon State assistant SID Hank Hager sent out pics of the special Nike uniform from New York City. He said OSU’s is in the middle of this picture, jersey No. 1. I’ll have better ones as the days progresses.
Here’s a clear shot below.
OSU released that the uniforms will be worn during the Civil War. I knew they would be used on a big national game – USC or Oregon.
Well, tell me what you think of them. Don’t hold back.
And a side view of the helmet.
Here is the press released that describes what you are seeing.
NEW YORK CITY – The new one-time use Oregon State football uniform was revealed Wednesday morning in Manhattan as the Beavers were one of 10 teams to to use the Nike Pro Combat uniforms.
The Beavers, the only team to participate from the Pacific-10 Conference, will wear their uniform on Dec. 4 in the Civil War against Oregon.
The jersey is an ode to the Oregon State “Giant Killers” team from 1967. As described by Nike, an orange, called Solar Orange, is the predominant motif, seen on the helmet, base layer sleeves, pants and socks.
To match the archival dirtied white look of 1967, the pant color is Sail instead of stark white. An iconic ‘O’ mark is used on the front left hip of the pant, while ‘OSU’ forms on the gloves when the palms face outward.
Corresponding footwear in Solar Orange and Black completes the ensemble.
“The Nike Pro Combat System of Dress merges innovation and inspiration to deliver the lightest uniform in the industry,” Global VP and GM of Nike Athletic Training Kris Aman said. “The designs incorporate cultural cues emblematic of each team’s identity and heritage. They’re more than uniforms, they’re expressions of pride.”
With padding integrated into the base layer, the outer uniform becomes a lightweight, breathable sheath with a fitted, superhero look.
The sleek jersey and pant are constructed from a four-way stretch twill that rapidly sheds sweat and water, ensuring that even when wet, these uniforms are lighter than their standard-issue counterparts when completely dry.
Overall, the uniform is 37 percent lighter than current designs.
++++
USA Today has story up about technology in the home vs. the stadium. Of course, that brings up the site of the season opener – Cowboys Stadium. Here’s sidebar on the videoboard.


27 comments
angrybeaver says:
May 18, 2012
I love the retro look, but wouldn't love this uniform for an entire season. It's just a bit too dated. For one or two games it's great.
Tighten and simplify it the current uniform a bit and you have a classic yet modern look. Still think the long-term helmets should be all white/gun-metal black matte and the uniform's orange should be tweaked a shade towards red. The angry beaver cartoon is amateurish and hokey.
http://angrybeavs.com
Kyleaelliott says:
May 18, 2012
Don't love them or hate them… May look a bit better on someone with a normal body/head ratio… The Helmet looks way to big on him, that's all I can focus on.
angrybeaver says:
May 18, 2012
I changed my mind (didn't see the side view of the helmet the first time around). The holes and indent on the helmet are both horrible. Why is Nike so bad?
-angry
ObjCritic says:
May 18, 2012
Because they're willing to make things "different" and "edgy" and the cost of making thembetter.
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
All those holes are for function rather than design. Those new HITS (acronym for something) helmets are designed to take shots on the crown and diminish their effects. I think that's the Riddell Revolution Speed helmet.
ObjCritic says:
May 18, 2012
Is it Christmas morning in Cleveland? Looks like a lil' kid in a Cleveland Browns uniform….College football fashion shows…this is sexist. Why aren't they doing this with the cheerleaders?!?
On the helmets suggested by Angry, I'd go with black facemask on the white, orange facemask on the black.
ckbeav says:
May 18, 2012
i like em'
aaron_ says:
May 18, 2012
Nike did it to us AGAIN!!!!! The others are sleek looking and then there is ours.
Hey Cliff when does our contract with Nike run out? we need to have addidas do our uniforms from now on. First the Bra, now this…..
tradernum1 says:
May 18, 2012
My first thought was Dee Andros. My second thought was Steve Preece. A little too retro for me.
I like the Nike tie in, but this isn't their best work.
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
Is the sleeve font the same as the torso? I can't quite tell. It looks different.
sanjait says:
May 18, 2012
Like the retro helmet stripe. Since the Penn St game, I've kind of been wishing we could have just a classic simple uni design too. The angry badger is ok, but doesn't need to be on the helmet i think. I don't know why the helmet is so big or why the guy has stripy armbands though. That just makes the guy look odd.
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
Yeah, the model we get to show our uniform kinda screams equipment manager. I remember the conversation about the stripes for tOSU a couple years back. Nike likes to carry the stripes from the helmet to the sleeves for continuity. Those were on the trim up under the shoulder pads though, and they looked pretty good there. I'm not quite sure why they would have to have big stripey long sleeves though. It looks like the big stripey socks are lost when pulled up.
Those day-glo orange shoes are just out of place.
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
It was nice of Boise State to let Florida wear their old uniforms, but what's with their helmets? And, again, poor VaTech. We go Lunchpail U, and they go Lunchpail Couture. And WVU must be glad to be rid of those yellow swatches they called uniforms.
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
Hey Cliff, I read the USA Today article on the NFL and HDTV and big screens at stadiums. There was one written today by an O reporter talking about the Matthew Knight Arena as well. Is HDTV sponsoring the day?
What struck me as odd was that the writer says there are no bad seats for viewing because the scoreboard screens are huge. Why would anyone want to go to an arena just to watch the game on TV? I've been inside MKA, and there are many bad seats due to the poor choice to tier the upper ranges rather than carry the bowl upwards… and way too many upper range seats on the end lines.
They can sell the arena's larger concourses, numerous concession stands and indoor plumbing, but they chose the bowl design itself poorly. Watching TV while at the arena doesn't enhance the experience. It provides the only good view you're going to get.
angrybeaver says:
May 18, 2012
A large reason attendances are declining is that HDTV is so good; I'd rather watch on TV than go to a game, generally speaking. They're catching on to this, so sports channels and HD will likely spike in the next five years. People think it's the bad economy, and it probably is to a certain extent (i.e. there are still millions of people with disposable income), but I think it's advancement in TV coupled with outrageous ticket prices (at least for the middle income fan).
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
Well, yes the ticket prices are outrageous. They're that way everywhere. For me to attend the CW hoops game at the MKA with my family, I will have to spend $150. And that's for lousy seats.
The CW at Gill (where this is no bad seat) will cost me less than $100 after buying gas for the trip up to Corvallis and packing a meal for the trip… and buying a six-pack of homebrew for when I get home. I'll probably still have about $20 left out of $100 after making a day of it… as opposed to going three miles down the road and feeling like I got cheated.
Even if I had the disposable income to spend on every event I wanted to attend, I would avoid the events where I felt so cheated comparatively. I think Bobby D learned this the hard way. It's not necessarily about a poor economy, though that may factor a little. It's about product and price point. If I'm going to spend $150 to go down the road to watch a hoops game on TV, why not spend nothing to sit at home and watch it on TV?
And I don't even have HDTV.
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
Here's another one… BB King is playing in Eugene for $70 minimum ticket prices. I've seen him a half dozen times, and I never spent more than $15 on any of those events.
I love his music. I love the genre. He's a legend in American music. I would love for my kids to have the experience of seeing him just once in their lives.
But I'm not going to spend $70 to see anyone. Period.
angrybeaver says:
May 18, 2012
I love blues as well, but I prefer Delta/acoustic. Big fan of Robert Johnson, Mississippi John Hurt, Leadbelly, Skip James et al. Pretty much anything the Lomax's touched is gold.
I realize BB was born in the Delta area, but I associate his sound with Chicago/electric blues.
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
While I really like the original delta blues like Son House, Bukka White and really early Muddy Waters, I really love the polish a later Muddy Waters and John Lee Hooker put on the sound.
I also love the larger arrangements of a Howlin' Wolf or even Muddy Waters going electric. I know purists hated Electric Mud, but that is one awesome album. I guess I'm more a fan of the bigger sound with complex layers rather than the homespun guitar and vocals of a raw blues tune. I wouldn't go so far as to say that I like where Bo Diddley took the Chicago sound from where it was in the days of Big Bill Broonzy, Elmore James and Little Walter. But I do like the sound produced by John Lee Hooker and James Cotton over the old timers like a Pinetop Perkins.
I see the era when all those delta blues musicians were migrating from the South to Chicago, Kansas City and Detroit as the best time for the genre. 1950-1970 was a special sound. So while you like the Lomax brothers for their sound, I guess you can say I like the Chess brothers for theirs.
angrybeaver says:
May 18, 2012
I never complain when Hooker or Cotton come on Pandora, but I don't seek it out like I do with the old time Delta players. I'd say I'm an average fan of the electric sound, and huge fan of the lo-fidelity, simple, soul bearing of the earlier era. Skip James records just sound flat out eerie in a good way. You can't find that anywhere else.
PackALunch says:
May 18, 2012
I really like them. I like the matte finish on the helmets.
They'll look a lot better on beefy football bodies, versus the scrawny chump they've got modeling this one.
mxpx5678 says:
May 18, 2012
I think the uniforms look much better on the Nike website. check out this link. http://www.nike.com/nikeos/p/usnikefootball/en_US…
I think the skinny model wearing the Oregon state uniform is making it look worse than it is
OSU4life says:
May 18, 2012
I think they are AWESOME! My main question is: "Why not wear these new uni's vs TCU?" Not only do these new uniforms look like the 1967 "Giant Killers" but they also remind me of the 1998 uniforms when Ken Simonton scored the winning TD vs oregon in the 44-41 Civil War win!!! Everyone will love these uniforms after OSU beats oregon!
JoeAvezzano says:
May 18, 2012
I don't care if they wear tutus as long as they whip ass.
ObjCritic says:
May 18, 2012
too dam funny. RIley hopes to get one year of production out of him after 3 years of development and one year of redshirt…
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
Thanks for repeating what I said. I would have left out the ad hominem though… as I did when I wrote the original.
JackBeav says:
May 18, 2012
Ok… I really think VaTech and TCU got jacked on this one. They lose their traditional identity by going with our colors instead, and all the design aspects look more like a garish decoupage for TCU and a lazy batique for VaTech.
I guess there are going to be people on all sides of each design.