The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

I've bit my tongue on this for a while. But these new coaches polos are a joke.

Under Armour has always loved to put their dumb*** logo on the sleeves or the back of the neck, but this year they've pushed all their chips into the center of the table and are now featuring their logo right below UC's. Two logos, the same size.

I shouldn't be complaining, they are saving me money. It takes a lot to dissuade me from blowing money on a new Bearcat polo but they sure managed to do it.

While i'm at it, their hats stink too.

I miss adidas' hats. The adidas polos were nothing to write home about but they'd still age better than this hokey stuff UA puts out. Nike is king.

Rant over.

Eighty-five bucks seems a little pricey. I know UC gets a cut but I'd rather donate directly.

(07-30-2019 10:41 AM)DownOnRohs Wrote:  I've bit my tongue on this for a while. But these new coaches polos are a joke.

Under Armor has always loved to put their dumb*** logo on the sleeves or the back of the neck, but this year they've pushed all their chips into the center of the table and are now featuring their logo right below UC's. Two logos, the same size.

I shouldn't be complaining, they are saving me money. It takes a lot to dissuade me from blowing money on a new Bearcat polo but they sure managed to do it.

While i'm at it, their hats stink too.

I miss adidas' hats. The adidas polos were nothing to write home about but they'd still age better than this hokey stuff UA puts out. Nike is king.

Rant over.

I agree that those polos are terrible.

To me it just looks like the C-paw is sitting on a coffee table...

Yes, they are awful. UA is always last to release their team gear when compared to Nike and Adidas. They do have some good products but the sizing is inconsistent. You almost need to know fabric and fit type to have any chance. Their traditional charges cotton blend runs big, while their 60/40 or 50/50 rum smaller. Triblend used to run big then they ran small then somewhere in between. All are considered loose fits as opposed to fitted. Whatever UA can you at least get the sizing right. Designs have ranged from decent to awful, they seemingly have no idea what fans actually want. Prices are high and quality is meh. Printing technology seems very basic too. Nike has a few really neat printing techniques.

You can always find examples of awful gear. There is plenty of good stuff as well.

(07-30-2019 10:50 AM)cpawstoney Wrote:  Eighty-five bucks seems a little pricey. I know UC gets a cut but I'd rather donate directly.

This is where my brain immediately goes. They best be the best effing polo shirts in the universe for me to spend $85 on them...and I still won't.

(07-30-2019 10:41 AM)DownOnRohs Wrote:  I've bit my tongue on this for a while. But these new coaches polos are a joke.

Under Armour has always loved to put their dumb*** logo on the sleeves or the back of the neck, but this year they've pushed all their chips into the center of the table and are now featuring their logo right below UC's. Two logos, the same size.

I shouldn't be complaining, they are saving me money. It takes a lot to dissuade me from blowing money on a new Bearcat polo but they sure managed to do it.

While i'm at it, their hats stink too.

I miss adidas' hats. The adidas polos were nothing to write home about but they'd still age better than this hokey stuff UA puts out. Nike is king.

Rant over.

Considering how strict UC is in terms of how the logo is used, I can't believe they allowed this. Typically logos are given clear space 2-3 times the space between the two logos here. Source: Creative Director.

Those polos look ridiculous, but the ones a few years ago that were two toned were actually really solid.

(07-30-2019 11:54 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Those polos look ridiculous, but the ones a few years ago that were two toned were actually really solid.

I've thought about ordering this one. I mean my wife thinks I wear too many UC Polos as his, but I think this one is slick. https://shop.gobearcats.com/mens-colosse...2948201675

(07-30-2019 11:58 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(07-30-2019 11:54 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Those polos look ridiculous, but the ones a few years ago that were two toned were actually really solid.

I've thought about ordering this one. I mean my wife thinks I wear too many UC Polos as his, but I think this one is slick. https://shop.gobearcats.com/mens-colosse...2948201675

Those are pretty cool in person if you can pull them off (I cannot), I like the one with the red side panel more than just the plain one.

I was referring to these polos, specifically the gray and black version. Very classy without any super crazy designs going on.
https://shop.gobearcats.com/mens-under-a...2750009472

I don't like UA either but we don't have much choice in the matter. We still have 5 more years on the contract and my guess is we burnt the bridge with Adidas and I doubt Nike will be willing to pay us any substantial money. Won't be surprised if extended the deal in a few years, but hope UC will have enough leverage to make a few demands on the company.

I actually like the polo design and have been very pleased with UA... I seem to be in the minority in that though.

People always seem to want Nike, but I have never liked Nike's products as they have always fallen apart on me. I have some under Armor products that have lasted almost 15 years at this point.

(07-30-2019 11:58 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(07-30-2019 11:54 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Those polos look ridiculous, but the ones a few years ago that were two toned were actually really solid.

I've thought about ordering this one. I mean my wife thinks I wear too many UC Polos as his, but I think this one is slick. https://shop.gobearcats.com/mens-colosse...2948201675

And... it works for both a white-out and a black-out

(07-30-2019 12:44 PM)Banter Wrote:  I actually like the polo design and have been very pleased with UA... I seem to be in the minority in that though.

People always seem to want Nike, but I have never liked Nike's products as they have always fallen apart on me. I have some under Armor products that have lasted almost 15 years at this point.

I haven't had a strong opinion either way. I've liked the under armor uniforms (basketball has been a huge upgrade from adidas). I thought Jordan had our best basketball uniforms (though the final four unis are great too). I thought Adidas had our best football unis. I thought all of the companies had good and bad clothing available for the general public.

(07-30-2019 12:44 PM)Banter Wrote:  I actually like the polo design and have been very pleased with UA... I seem to be in the minority in that though.

People always seem to want Nike, but I have never liked Nike's products as they have always fallen apart on me. I have some under Armor products that have lasted almost 15 years at this point.

I like them as well. I'm also a person who cannot stand Nike apparel. I even hated it when UC had the Jordan brand. Expensive crap as far as I'm concerned.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I generally like UA apparel when compared across the board for comfort, breath-ability, and design, but the prices are a bit steep. UA is my almost exclusive golf apparel maker at this point, however, I like some of the Nike polos for casual wear.

I'm with you on Nike; it's been a long time since I've bought anything Nike. Some of their golf stuff is comically bad. You'd have to pay me double to wear some of the clown outfits their golfers do.

(07-30-2019 10:41 AM)DownOnRohs Wrote:  I've bit my tongue on this for a while. But these new coaches polos are a joke.

Under Armour has always loved to put their dumb*** logo on the sleeves or the back of the neck, but this year they've pushed all their chips into the center of the table and are now featuring their logo right below UC's. Two logos, the same size.

I shouldn't be complaining, they are saving me money. It takes a lot to dissuade me from blowing money on a new Bearcat polo but they sure managed to do it.

While i'm at it, their hats stink too.

I miss adidas' hats. The adidas polos were nothing to write home about but they'd still age better than this hokey stuff UA puts out. Nike is king.

Rant over.

If your link is correct, it took me to the 2018 shirt. Here's what I saw for 2019 recently at Dick's. It's solid black with a single white and red stripe horizontally across the chest and the C-Paw alone on the chest with the UA logo on the sleeve. I like this one:

https://www.dickssportinggoods.com/p/und...lsrc=aw.ds

(07-30-2019 01:55 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(07-30-2019 10:41 AM)DownOnRohs Wrote:  I've bit my tongue on this for a while. But these new coaches polos are a joke.

Under Armour has always loved to put their dumb*** logo on the sleeves or the back of the neck, but this year they've pushed all their chips into the center of the table and are now featuring their logo right below UC's. Two logos, the same size.

I shouldn't be complaining, they are saving me money. It takes a lot to dissuade me from blowing money on a new Bearcat polo but they sure managed to do it.

While i'm at it, their hats stink too.

I miss adidas' hats. The adidas polos were nothing to write home about but they'd still age better than this hokey stuff UA puts out. Nike is king.

Rant over.

If your link is correct, it took me to the 2018 shirt. Here's what I saw for 2019 recently at Dick's. It's solid black with a single white and red stripe horizontally across the chest and the C-Paw with the UA logo on the sleeve. I like this one:

https://www.dickssportinggoods.com/p/und...lsrc=aw.ds

That's sharp.