EagleOutsider.com

Does anyone have information on the new uniforms? I hear their are 4 different color helmets, white, black with BC block logo, gold and gold with maroon eagle wings.

Go Eagles!

There were helmets posted online by a guy unaffiliated with BC. These are not actual uniform/helmet changes.

https://twitter.com/iu_customs/status/1 ... 96385?s=21

Those are the helmets I saw. The 3rd looks like what we have now. I like #4 with the eagle wings. That could look good on the hockey helmet as well. Please, no white or black, those are not our colors. Penn St has the white outs and Louisville has had black outs as has FSU.

Go Eagles!

I regret clicking on this thread.

Some people just don't belong on the internet. Corners, you're one of them.

Supahfan99 {l Wrote}:Some people just don't belong on the internet. Corners, you're one of them.

savage

That info came from within the BCAA. New coach new uniforms? You have to believe JH is going to change things up quite a bit.

Go Eagles!

BCAA??? Seriously? That’s just stupid alums (who pretend they have inside info) talking to stupider alums (who believe them). So... pretty much these boards (but with meatbombs confined to the stall of Keeper’s tapping foot).

One of the recruiting guys on staff, Joe Sullivan, tweeted in a response to AJ Dillon today that there are new uniforms planned for the 2021 season

BCSUPERFAN22 {l Wrote}:One of the recruiting guys on staff, Joe Sullivan, tweeted in a response to AJ Dillon today that there are new uniforms planned for the 2021 season

He also said Dillon would be happy with them and Dillon chose the slanted logo in the logo competition sponsored by BC Athletics.
Isn't the slanted logo already on uniforms? or just the eagle flying?

I saw Sullivan allude to a contract being the reason why the new uniforms are coming in 2021 and not this season, so maybe we’re finally ditching under armor?

BC923 {l Wrote}:I saw Sullivan allude to a contract being the reason why the new uniforms are coming in 2021 and not this season, so maybe we’re finally ditching under armor?

Do we want to ditch them? I thought the kids like it.

DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:

BC923 {l Wrote}:I saw Sullivan allude to a contract being the reason why the new uniforms are coming in 2021 and not this season, so maybe we’re finally ditching under armor?

Do we want to ditch them? I thought the kids like it.

Football I’m not sure it’s a huge difference, but it definitely hurts in basketball.

BC923 {l Wrote}:

DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:

BC923 {l Wrote}:I saw Sullivan allude to a contract being the reason why the new uniforms are coming in 2021 and not this season, so maybe we’re finally ditching under armor?

Do we want to ditch them? I thought the kids like it.

Football I’m not sure it’s a huge difference, but it definitely hurts in basketball.

Kids are not avoiding playing for Jimmy Mac because of the shoes. Our best sustained success in the sport (under Skinner) came when we had the worst shoe arrangement. We could have an entire arm of Nike making shoes that sell out on SNKRS the second they drop... and BC would still miss the Tourney each year. UCLA, Wisconsin, Auburn, Maryland, ND, Cincy, Temple (our new AD), Cal, Gamecocks, Utah and Texas Tech all are able to find players who aren't paid by Nike.

There is nothing wrong with Under Armour, except the complete lack of development in the uniform (which may have been BC's choosing).

HJS {l Wrote}:

BC923 {l Wrote}:

DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:

BC923 {l Wrote}:I saw Sullivan allude to a contract being the reason why the new uniforms are coming in 2021 and not this season, so maybe we’re finally ditching under armor?

Do we want to ditch them? I thought the kids like it.

Football I’m not sure it’s a huge difference, but it definitely hurts in basketball.

Kids are not avoiding playing for Jimmy Mac because of the shoes. Our best sustained success in the sport (under Skinner) came when we had the worst shoe arrangement. We could have an entire arm of Nike making shoes that sell out on SNKRS the second they drop... and BC would still miss the Tourney each year. UCLA, Wisconsin, Auburn, Maryland, ND, Cincy, Temple (our new AD), Cal, Gamecocks, Utah and Texas Tech all are able to find players who aren't paid by Nike.

There is nothing wrong with Under Armour, except the complete lack of development in the uniform (which may have been BC's choosing).

To be clear, the Nike/SNKRS arrangement you discussed would get BC pretty much any recruit of their choosing in both sports (see Oregon, University of). It's also insane.

The sponsorship isn't the reason we suck, but it doesn't help. Adidas sponsors Mass Rivals and BABC is obviously Nike. I've also heard UAs cleats for football are terrible.

Forget where I read this, but Im fairly certain that UA is one of (if not the) leader in footwear on the football side at HS level, a long way from the early days when USCe was complaining about the cleats damaging their feet and injuring players. I agree, at least on the football side, you'd like to see UA push more stuff (if you look at their website, they obv push a lot of ND/UCLA but also more Wisconsin and Navy apparel) but they do a fine job overall, no different than what Nike would do as a second level priority school. They have actually been making strides on the consumer apparel customization side so I wonder if they would ever integrate that to the collegiate division for fans to have more options.

I also have a feeling that Addazio didn't really care about that side of things and just took whatever baseline shit UA sent them under the terms of their contract. Perfect example, albeit a small one, look at what Addazio wore on sidelines in inclement weather. Nothing custom, nothing logo'd, just basic UA rain apparel. Obviously contrast with ND and it does make BC look JV, but I am not convinced thats because of the arrangement and more with leadership. Maybe that changes with a younger Hafley (and someone from a more recent, big time program where the apparel stuff has become more important than when Addazio was at his last big time stop) who is likely more marketable and perhaps sees the benefit in recruiting to try and leverage the UA brand.

I tend to doubt the role that it plays on the basketball side. BC has recruited so nationally since the Skinner days that im not going to lose sleep over not having the same shoe contract as BABC or one of the local AAU programs. Maybe it would help, but that aint why BC has struggled under JC. As was pointed out before, BC excelled in both BB and FB when they were under contract with Reebok, a total afterthought.

BCSUPERFAN22 {l Wrote}:Forget where I read this, but Im fairly certain that UA is one of (if not the) leader in footwear on the football side at HS level, a long way from the early days when USCe was complaining about the cleats damaging their feet and injuring players. I agree, at least on the football side, you'd like to see UA push more stuff (if you look at their website, they obv push a lot of ND/UCLA but also more Wisconsin and Navy apparel) but they do a fine job overall, no different than what Nike would do as a second level priority school. They have actually been making strides on the consumer apparel customization side so I wonder if they would ever integrate that to the collegiate division for fans to have more options.

I also have a feeling that Addazio didn't really care about that side of things and just took whatever baseline shit UA sent them under the terms of their contract. Perfect example, albeit a small one, look at what Addazio wore on sidelines in inclement weather. Nothing custom, nothing logo'd, just basic UA rain apparel. Obviously contrast with ND and it does make BC look JV, but I am not convinced thats because of the arrangement and more with leadership. Maybe that changes with a younger Hafley (and someone from a more recent, big time program where the apparel stuff has become more important than when Addazio was at his last big time stop) who is likely more marketable and perhaps sees the benefit in recruiting to try and leverage the UA brand.

I tend to doubt the role that it plays on the basketball side. BC has recruited so nationally since the Skinner days that im not going to lose sleep over not having the same shoe contract as BABC or one of the local AAU programs. Maybe it would help, but that aint why BC has struggled under JC. As was pointed out before, BC excelled in both BB and FB when they were under contract with Reebok, a total afterthought.

It does matter in the basketball world, but if we pick Adidas you'll alienate BABC and if you pick Nike you'll alienate Mass Rivals. Ultimately they stink under JC because he isn't a very good basketball coach working with non-existent facilities.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

BCSUPERFAN22 {l Wrote}:Forget where I read this, but Im fairly certain that UA is one of (if not the) leader in footwear on the football side at HS level, a long way from the early days when USCe was complaining about the cleats damaging their feet and injuring players. I agree, at least on the football side, you'd like to see UA push more stuff (if you look at their website, they obv push a lot of ND/UCLA but also more Wisconsin and Navy apparel) but they do a fine job overall, no different than what Nike would do as a second level priority school. They have actually been making strides on the consumer apparel customization side so I wonder if they would ever integrate that to the collegiate division for fans to have more options.

I also have a feeling that Addazio didn't really care about that side of things and just took whatever baseline shit UA sent them under the terms of their contract. Perfect example, albeit a small one, look at what Addazio wore on sidelines in inclement weather. Nothing custom, nothing logo'd, just basic UA rain apparel. Obviously contrast with ND and it does make BC look JV, but I am not convinced thats because of the arrangement and more with leadership. Maybe that changes with a younger Hafley (and someone from a more recent, big time program where the apparel stuff has become more important than when Addazio was at his last big time stop) who is likely more marketable and perhaps sees the benefit in recruiting to try and leverage the UA brand.

I tend to doubt the role that it plays on the basketball side. BC has recruited so nationally since the Skinner days that im not going to lose sleep over not having the same shoe contract as BABC or one of the local AAU programs. Maybe it would help, but that aint why BC has struggled under JC. As was pointed out before, BC excelled in both BB and FB when they were under contract with Reebok, a total afterthought.

It does matter in the basketball world, but if we pick Adidas you'll alienate BABC and if you pick Nike you'll alienate Mass Rivals. Ultimately they stink under JC because he isn't a very good basketball coach working with non-existent facilities.

Make an apparel decision based on basketball is funny.
Luckily it will never happen here at BC.

BC announced a new long term contract with UA two years ago. We are not changing outfitters in the next 5 years. I confirmed this with an assistant AD. UA does not promote BC because people don’t buy BC gear. Winning sells merchandise. It’s pathetic though that every school except BC had specialty shoes made for sale to the public on the UA website. We need somebody in the athletic department pushing UA to carry more BC products.

Go Eagles!

ugh, so depressing to read that we're stuck with UA.

UA does not promote BC because people don’t buy BC gear.

This is the sports apparel equivalent of "We are what we are" or "Boston media will never cover BC because nobody cares about college sports". So you're telling me if you don't promote something people won't buy it? Shocking.

Does anyone know where you can purchase the grey varsity looking jacket that MJ was always wearing? Maybe if they put the good merchandise up for sale people would buy it.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B4a45VfAjch/

StratEagle {l Wrote}:Maybe if they put the good merchandise up for sale people would buy it.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B4a45VfAjch/

Ain't that the motherfucking truth. Jacket looks nice, BUT...you just gotta hope that it's decently made. I don't really trust UA's quality, outside of the jerseys they've produced.

Los {l Wrote}:

UA does not promote BC because people don’t buy BC gear.

This is the sports apparel equivalent of "We are what we are" or "Boston media will never cover BC because nobody cares about college sports". So you're telling me if you don't promote something people won't buy it? Shocking.

Eh, I think it's the sports apparel equivalent of "marketing"

StratEagle {l Wrote}:Does anyone know where you can purchase the grey varsity looking jacket that MJ was always wearing? Maybe if they put the good merchandise up for sale people would buy it.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B4a45VfAjch/

It was for sale in the bookstore. Red one is still available, on fire sale.

https://www.bkstr.com/bostoncollegestore/product/sale-and-clearance/clothing-accessories-sale-and-clearance/boston-college-1-4-zip-double-knit-ncaa-150-top-547143-1

IF we play this year, are we wearing the pseudo throwbacks? Every Facebook post and marketing item I see shows the players in those uniforms.

xu9697 {l Wrote}:IF we play this year, are we wearing the pseudo throwbacks? Every Facebook post and marketing item I see shows the players in those uniforms.

I’ve noticed the same and am pretty optimistic that’s the approach they’ll take. The throwbacks have been pretty well received the last couple years. You see a ton of the replicas now on game days.

Seems like we’re getting a reveal on Wednesday.

https://twitter.com/bcfootball/status/1296612985142685697?s=21

Getting rid of the center stripe on the helmet from the looks of it.

It looks like the stripe has been moved to the inside of the helmet this year.