I tweeted Sam Khan from the Chronicle and he said new uniforms would be unveiled "ASAP", according to Mack Rhodes. He thinks this summer.
Speaking as a third generation Cougar, I'm really disappointed that nothing is sacred and EVERYTHING is up for sale. The "old" logo has so much history and tradition attached to it. I grew up watching Shasta roam the sidelines at the Dome, while the Cougars made multiple trips to the Cotton Bowl in the big bad SWC. My Mom was there as UH took down UCLA in the game of the century that ushered in TV. From GuyV and Otis Birdsong to PSJ .....the memories are thick. And that's just the on field/court stuff. The University of Houston has been a constant throughout my life/family....I'm always home when I'm there. So, while I'm ecstatic about everyone finally being on the same page, our deliverance into the new stadium (along with renovations to Hofheinz), and the move up the conference ladder, I really regret that they had to mess with a key part of our identity. This looks like a commercialized, pre-packaged "we're going to the Big East and getting a new stadium, let's ring the registers", slick Madison Avenue marketing ploy...... Nevertheless, Eat em up Coogs!
My sentiments exactly...While I will miss the old logo with accompanying tradition, I will grow to love the new one and it'll force me to buy new stuff lol Go Coogs!
UH Spring Game Update: First of all, UH was wearing their new logo on the helmets. They looked good. The lettering seemed to be a darker red color. Midfield was the new logo as well, also with the darker red color. The endzones which read "Houston" and "Cougars" also had a new design to them. Overall, the field and helmets looked really nice. Now to the game... A few notable players that didn't play: D.J. Hayden (He played one series but sat the rest of the game). Charles Sims Zach McMillian Mark Roberts Shane Ros Lloyd Allen Jacolby Ashworth DeAndre Perry Zeke Riser (This dude looks like JJ Watt physically...he is a big SOB) A few former players showed up to the game as well Keenum, Sammy Brown, Hayes, Carrier, and Hunter. I saw Isiah Thompson at the Cougar Den also. He said he got cut by the Bills but have a few tryouts lineup with various teams. He said he has offers in Canada if things don't work out in the NFL. He put on 40 pounds since his senior year, he has gotten BIG. Ok... to the game for real this time. Players that stood out: Trevon Randle: Linebacker transfer from LSU. He was the first guy I noticed out there. Monster. He was in on every tackle. Sadly, he is sitting out next year bc of the transfer rule. But he is good. Piland: Threw very very well. Threw a couple 30/40 yard out passes to the sidelines with ease. Didn't really throw deep, but he completed almost all of his passes. Clear number one QB Kohlhausen: Clear #2 QB. He also has a cannon. Made a few bonehead throws, threw a pick late in the game. Much much much better than Crawford Jones he played ahead of him tonight. Valencia: Big hitter, in on almost every tackle as well. Desmond Pulliam: DE. Got to the QB a couple of times. Shut down the run. He was the best looking player on the DL tonight. Derrick Mathews: In on almost every tackle. Look real good. Kelvin King: BIG dude. Played with 2nd team but was wrecking havoc on D. DeAnthony Sims: OL HUGE lineman. Played very well protecting the QBs. Played with 2nd team but was by far the best OL on the 2nd team. Isaiah Sweeney: Best looking WR out there. He is the "next" Carrier. Super super fast. The offense started slow tonight but the passing game looked good. Absolutely no running game tonight, however Sims didn't play at all. Defense was confused sometimes, seemed obvious that switching to the 43 was an adjustment. Had some big hitters out there though. Lastly (sorry this is long), after the game I was walking to my car and saw Crawford Jones sitting on the tailgate of his car drinking a beer probably 15 minutes after the game ended with his buddies. That attitude certainly explains his awful quarterbacking skills. Got a question about a certain player or anything let me know. I can't wait for football season! Go Coogs
Oh and Oliphant did good too on the DL. He and Pulliam were a good combo. Oliphant had a couple of "sacks" in the game. And by sacks I mean just touched the QB and the whistle blew. But at least he was around the QB. And for the RB's. Even though they all looked pretty bad. Welford was the best one, he bulled a few LB's over. He is 26 years old though I noticed. Not sure how that happened.
What are you talking about? The SWC era logo hasn't been around since 1997 or so. 15 years of the "phat" UH isn't exactly a lot. And during those 15 years, the "secondary" logo got changed like 4 times as well.
I didn't see a UH Basketball Thread, but tonight at 6 p.m. on ESPN, UH Recruit Daniel House will play in the Jordan Brand Classic in Charlotte. There are other top recruits there as well. It will be fun to watch him play and to see what the national announcers have to say about him. Sorry for wrong thread
The helmets weren't new. Only the logo (sticker). The new helmets and jerseys won't be here until August.
Looks like most of us over looked one of the most obvious comparisons to our new oval cougar logo. Missouri might have the logo that looks closest to ours. Here is a link to a pick of the there new uniforms with their oval tiger logo now on there helmet. http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/4/14/2948841/mizzou-uniforms-nike-pictures
No, the idea behind a new logo was to have a single, united logo for the university and athletics, but in typical UH fashion it was cooged. If you notice the university is using a skinny beveled UH on its marketing now. Athletics is using a block beveled UH.
No it wasn't. That was never part of the plan. Academics and athletics operate separately. They haven't ever had the same logo in the history of the university. The athletics dept is separate from the school and isn't allowed to use their trademarks, etc, IIRC. They made them both beveled and made the athletic logo more balanced, which is about the best they could do in terms of making them "similar", but the objective was never to use the same logo for both.
Really? That seems odd that they wouldn't be "allowed" to use the same logo, etc as the school, but what do I know? The new logo isn't a bad update, but there's something about that little filled-in triangle between the U and the H that bothers me. Uni-watch article on the UH logo (plus bonus A&M coverage!): http://www.uni-watch.com/2012/04/13...go-draws-comparison-to-texas-am-beveled-logo/ I didn't even notice the asymmetrical beveling until I read that.
It's the same deal with UT. The "longhorn" logo is property of the athletic dept, not the university. Etc. As for the "mistake", the funny thing is, the triangle wasn't actually a mistake. That was done on purpose. And I agree with it. The other options look bad, IMO. Now, you know what actually was a mistake? The beveling on the top left corner of the "H" was missing in the initial design. It has since been corrected, but there's a small batch of UH merch out there with the incorrect logo on it.
Oh yeah, I know they're owned separately, but it seems like the school and the athletic department could coordinate something if they wanted to (whether they would/should want to is another matter). Nbd, either way Agreed about the other options looking worse, although the logo you posted on the right doesn't look too bad when the colors are inverted. Although I guess the logo on the helmets will be white-on-red, so yeah, the triangle was probably the best option. Glad they fixed the beveling though
The helmets were still "new". They didn't look like they used to, so they were new. I know the "style" hasn't changed, but the logo on the helmets were changed, which made them "new". Sorry if I used the wrong word.
