Helmet possibility in future
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2023 9:08 pm
I think we could do a electric blue helmet variation at some time like the Lions
Oh I certainly don't disagree. I think they have done a great job with marketing the program on social media, and it is definitely something that not only the current players, but also potential recruits enjoy.bigappleram wrote: ↑6 months ago While I agree alternate helmets are probably not first on the priority list some of you underestimate the role these things play in marketing the program.
Ya know who would love alternate helmets -- potential recruits, the actual players and fans. Now I know those are important stakeholders here (lol) but still. Oregon has literally built a brand off their merch and uniform innovations. We will never be that given their tie to Nike and P5 status but there have been a lot worse ideas thrown around here than the idea of doing an alternate helmet.
Almost all of the social media noise the team makes is around their various uniform color ways. This is marketing especially to young people in the digital age. They care about this stuff.
And we should definitely hire the Michigan sign stealer if he's available !!
You know what's great for marketing and what recruits are attracted to? A winning program.bigappleram wrote: ↑6 months ago While I agree alternate helmets are probably not first on the priority list some of you underestimate the role these things play in marketing the program.
Ya know who would love alternate helmets -- potential recruits, the actual players and fans. Now I know those are important stakeholders here (lol) but still. Oregon has literally built a brand off their merch and uniform innovations. We will never be that given their tie to Nike and P5 status but there have been a lot worse ideas thrown around here than the idea of doing an alternate helmet.
Almost all of the social media noise the team makes is around their various uniform color ways. This is marketing especially to young people in the digital age. They care about this stuff.
And we should definitely hire the Michigan sign stealer if he's available !!
That's a pretty bold statement to make. But what statistics do you have to back this up? It's easy to say a Winning Program but how many wins? Is it a linear relationship of wins to what recruits are attracted to? Is the linear relationship the same for what marketing thinks is great?PlayMikeMotenMore wrote: ↑6 months agoYou know what's great for marketing and what recruits are attracted to? A winning program.bigappleram wrote: ↑6 months ago While I agree alternate helmets are probably not first on the priority list some of you underestimate the role these things play in marketing the program.
Ya know who would love alternate helmets -- potential recruits, the actual players and fans. Now I know those are important stakeholders here (lol) but still. Oregon has literally built a brand off their merch and uniform innovations. We will never be that given their tie to Nike and P5 status but there have been a lot worse ideas thrown around here than the idea of doing an alternate helmet.
Almost all of the social media noise the team makes is around their various uniform color ways. This is marketing especially to young people in the digital age. They care about this stuff.
And we should definitely hire the Michigan sign stealer if he's available !!
So.... you're not a fan of changing helmets?ramster wrote: ↑6 months agoThat's a pretty bold statement to make. But what statistics do you have to back this up? It's easy to say a Winning Program but how many wins? Is it a linear relationship of wins to what recruits are attracted to? Is the linear relationship the same for what marketing thinks is great?PlayMikeMotenMore wrote: ↑6 months agoYou know what's great for marketing and what recruits are attracted to? A winning program.bigappleram wrote: ↑6 months ago While I agree alternate helmets are probably not first on the priority list some of you underestimate the role these things play in marketing the program.
Ya know who would love alternate helmets -- potential recruits, the actual players and fans. Now I know those are important stakeholders here (lol) but still. Oregon has literally built a brand off their merch and uniform innovations. We will never be that given their tie to Nike and P5 status but there have been a lot worse ideas thrown around here than the idea of doing an alternate helmet.
Almost all of the social media noise the team makes is around their various uniform color ways. This is marketing especially to young people in the digital age. They care about this stuff.
And we should definitely hire the Michigan sign stealer if he's available !!
And how many wins do you need for marketing to think things are great and for recruits to be attracted? 20 wins? 24 wins?????
And over what period of time? Is that also a linear relationship of number of years with X numbers of wins
And do quality of wins matter? Quad 1, Quad 2, Quad 3, Quad 4? And wins on road vs wins at home?
And how does NIL play in now? Plus ability to legally compensate recruits with cars? Pay for play varies by school. How does Pay for Play impact recruiting in conjunction with a winning program?
Remember when you told me that David Cox did not damage the URI basketball program when I said he did? I admit I had not put together a complete study at the time I said it. Still sticking to that belief? And if so and documentation available hit me to peruse? I'm still thinking the David Cox decision did a bit of damage here as we enter our 6th post Dan Hurley season
It sounds to me if recruits and marketing love a winning program then David Cox's declining performance from year 1 to end of year 4 would have negatively impacted marketing and recruiting but that's just theoretical thinking on my part I admit.
I could care less about the helmets. I could care less about uniformsNYGFan_Section208 wrote: ↑6 months agoSo.... you're not a fan of changing helmets?ramster wrote: ↑6 months agoThat's a pretty bold statement to make. But what statistics do you have to back this up? It's easy to say a Winning Program but how many wins? Is it a linear relationship of wins to what recruits are attracted to? Is the linear relationship the same for what marketing thinks is great?PlayMikeMotenMore wrote: ↑6 months ago
You know what's great for marketing and what recruits are attracted to? A winning program.
And how many wins do you need for marketing to think things are great and for recruits to be attracted? 20 wins? 24 wins?????
And over what period of time? Is that also a linear relationship of number of years with X numbers of wins
And do quality of wins matter? Quad 1, Quad 2, Quad 3, Quad 4? And wins on road vs wins at home?
And how does NIL play in now? Plus ability to legally compensate recruits with cars? Pay for play varies by school. How does Pay for Play impact recruiting in conjunction with a winning program?
Remember when you told me that David Cox did not damage the URI basketball program when I said he did? I admit I had not put together a complete study at the time I said it. Still sticking to that belief? And if so and documentation available hit me to peruse? I'm still thinking the David Cox decision did a bit of damage here as we enter our 6th post Dan Hurley season
It sounds to me if recruits and marketing love a winning program then David Cox's declining performance from year 1 to end of year 4 would have negatively impacted marketing and recruiting but that's just theoretical thinking on my part I admit.