Developing a brand - Oregon Style....can we do it?

[snoblind]

Same ole argument seeker.
No point. You win. We are hung up on tradition accept it or not. I'm not here to force my opinion.

You are the one who showed up in thread thinking all a brand entails are flashy uniforms.  And when you got called on your shallow thinking you give up.  As pointed out by folks Oregon's brand isn't just about the unis.  Maybe that works for 12 year old's, but not for most folks or over a length of time.

Recognizing our traditions and uniqueness isn't being hung up in tradition,  The place to start strengthening the brand is building on those very things. 

[Pigsknuckles]

We have a very recognizable brand. Unfortunately, for the past 40 years, the brand has been equated with a gutsy underdog team that occasionally plays over it's head to upset an overconfident opponent. Hey, those aren't my words. Those are the words of many I have spoken with outside our little kingdom. We possess qualities that are a coveted draw (and a risk) for post season bowl selection committees. Folks like to watch us because, like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates, you never know what you are going to get. There is nothing wrong with our brand that consistent winning won't improve upon. Despite some of the HV negativity, we are a respected, and recognized program. Sure, we bite the big one now and again, but with the exception of Texas, most outside the SEC are rooting for us. Hopefully soon, we will provide a product that we deem more appropriate to their perceptions.

[pigbacon]

I'm not saying it's impossible, but likely will never happen. Oregon has NIKE to hang it's hat on and really that may be all. But it's a niche that appeals to the young crowd as well as the general population.

So what is UA appeal to accomplish such?
Logo/Uniforms?
Frank Broyles?
Wal-Mart?


Alabama has tradition, upon tradition, and more of such. Bear Bryant was more successful than Frank Broyles.

Oklahoma gets the praise for the traditional uniforms (which are similar to early Razorback unis; guess who strayed away?)
Wal-Mart does not have the same appeal as NIKE (even though more money), but the point here is the Walton's have no serious agenda nor reason to "Brand" or claim the U of A. Even if so, Nike is Premium, Wal-Mart is "Everyday Low Price".
Arkansas isn't the flagship academic institution in a state the size of "Texas".

However, I do think of Boise St. in recent years...if Arkansas could capture some of that lightning in a bottle it would be great. One coach- the right fit, with full support from the university, boosters, and fans- simply winning year after year. Winning the games you're suppose to and the ones you're not, year after year, is the ticket. Bielema possibly has the intangibles, but it's a slower paced chess mess rather than a Slam Dunk contest or Home Run Derby that thoroughly entertains the media, viewers and prospects (outside of Arkansas).

But dreams do sometimes come true.

[BadHog]

Phil Knight is worth about 35 times that of Jerry Jones.

[pigbacon]

Phil Knight is worth about 35 times that of Jerry Jones.

5X

[Hogfaniam]

What is Oregon's brand?  Seriously?  That they wear gaudy uniforms and their basketball court comes with seizure warnings when shown on TV?  They developed a gimmick which became a trend (sorta).

If you are more interested in football success then Oregon's had nothing to do with their uniforms.  Their 'secret' is that they developed a pay for play system for funneling recruits through handlers, and it worked...almost.

Can we do that?  Of course we can.


Random thought, I still have my Memphis Maniax hat.  Damn all those XFL teams had some slick unis...Oh well, never mind me and my random tangents.

Still have my Ax beanie.

And a Showboats tshirt.  Still really miss the 'Boats. FU Donald Trump

[redeye]

i truly believe oregon's success is all about the "swoosh" and as somebody mentioned starter or faded glory won't make that happen.

That's most of it.  Several years ago, Oregon was my 2nd favorite team, but they sucked and everyone hated them.  There was constant talk of how they had the ugliest colors in college football.  Fast forward a few years and young players all think they have the best looking uniforms in the game.  Nike has been THE brand in sports gear for decades and now they're helping Oregon gain a leg up on everyone else.  Before Nike started it's campaign to help Oregon, they were disliked almost as much as the UC Santa Cruz Banana Slug, though.

The "brand" we need to develop is that of a winning football program.  Alabama wears the plainest uniforms this side of Penn State and they seem to recruit and succeed just fine.

A great coach with a great plan who knows how to select, develop, and utilize winners.  Being intelligent as heck and understanding how to strategize, call, and play the game according to your own keen mind rather than just following "the book" doesn't hurt, either.

Everything else is just window dressing.

Exactly.  And this is the other thing that's made Oregon successful, because they've had great coaches.  If they played in the SEC, though, we wouldn't be having this discussion, because their style of football would fare about the same as it did against Ohio State against many SEC teams.

Personally, I don't see us building a brand like Oregon has with Nike, but I think Bielema is already building his brand here.

[twistitup]

^^^
Red,

And when Bielema leaves? Do we just let the next coach rebrand our program once again?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

^^^
Red,

And when Bielema leaves? Do we just let the next coach rebrand our program once again?

HC's and their philosophies, when successful, do help brand a program and that is unavoidable.

Just think about Nebraska as an example. When Devaney and Osborne were at the helm, they were known as a power rushing offense and the blackshirt defense. Very well known. What has their brand been since they left? No one knows. They lost their identity.

At Alabama, the Bear made them known for the same thing. After he retired, they lost their identity until Saban showed up and now they seem to be altering that image again with the arrival of Kiffin, but that story hasn't come to a conclusion, yet.

USC was known as the laid back, cool, surfer-dude team that played tough football under Pete Carroll. Now, they are just USC and trying to re-establish a natonal identity.

Texas was in the same boat as Nebraska for years under Darrell Royal, but have never consistently been the same since his departure.

Point being, your indentity (or brand) can be established on the basis of outlandish uniform combinations or it can be established on the basis of successful play. Oregon has managed to accomplish both and it is a good thing that they have won and been successful because they would look pretty foolish in all of those uniform combinations if they were only 4-8, 5-6 year after year. They would be laughable. It has turned out to be the perfect storm for them, but not many schools have Nike in their hip pocket to build those facilities and provide those uniforms, which by the way, helps advertise the Nike brand as well.

Our brand is being established and it doesn't require 15 different uniform combinations that sometimes look like they were designed by someone on drugs to do that.

Our standard brand is that Hog on the helmet. If we start winning consistently we won't have to worry about our brand being promoted, the media will do it for us.

[Pork Twain]

Maybe we shouldn't compare ourselves to Bama, OSU or Texass when it comes to college football.  Nebraska and Oklahomo are closer but still have us with tradition.

[Potosihog]

Other than "winning creates the brand" I'm not sure we can.  Not because it is impossible or because we don't have the money but because of timing.  Oregon hit the timing perfectly, took huge risk, and it paid off big time.  Everyone who has tried to do anything on the same level since then is seen as copying Oregon.

Other than creating a brand based on traditional power and long term winning complete success with complete rebranding doesn't happen much.

Blue fields, purple striped fields, or wildly crazy uniforms (Maryland) create a brand alright but not one equated with success.

I'll agree with someone earlier.  Oregon's cheating and Nike deal hit the perfect timing roulette wheel and paid off big time.  Unfortunately or fortunately that doesn't happen often.

[Hogfaniam]

Under this coach, our brand is The Uncommon Man. 

I've seen it being picked up on in numerous posts concerning players.  Like it or not, Arkansas sports, especially football, is looked at with integrity.  Yes, it started with Long's handling of Bikegate.  The torch is being carried by the coaches in recruiting by who they look for. 

Not just anybody with a fast 40 time or a 44 inch vertical will be offered a scholarship anymore.  Players parents will know that if Arkansas is looking at their son or daughter, then they know they've done a good job raising that child and the child is taking care of their own business. 

Other teams will look at a player differently if Arkansas starts recruiting them.  Recruiting services will value a player higher because of it. 

It can be our "brand" but it comes with a high price tag.  All it takes is one person to screw it up.  Administration and coaches can't let their guard down.  They must be diligent to keep the bar held high. Temptations to take short cuts are everywhere. 

The pressure from fans to win at all cost has to be avoided.

[hobhog]

Oregon is just a lackey for Nike. A billboard. Rest of NCAA followed suit with gimmicky unis. I'm ready to get back to traditional football.

[twistitup]

Oregon is just a lackey for Nike. A billboard. Rest of NCAA followed suit with gimmicky unis. I'm ready to get back to traditional football.

Thanks for the input Coach B

[BadHog]

5X

If you want to get picky then it's actually about 10x. However, the revenue produced by Nike and other various holdings of Knights outweigh Jone's by a billions more. Phil Knight has more trusts set up just to hold his class A stock than Jones (used to) has mistresses.

[Cresthog]

We got some top recruits last year after hitting rock bottom.

I think we're already developing our own brand.

Beilema's style will speak volumes to a lot of recruits. He's a genuine dude, very charismatic and what not. No homo.

I'd much rather have him in kids living rooms than a Petrino type.

[twistitup]

We got some top recruits last year after hitting rock bottom.

I think we're already developing our own brand.

Beilema's style will speak volumes to a lot of recruits. He's a genuine dude, very charismatic and what not. No homo.

I'd much rather have him in kids living rooms than a Petrino type.

Isn't there a big difference between a coaches brand and a program brand?

[Cresthog]

Isn't there a big difference between a coaches brand and a program brand?

In some cases sure. But I think it also turns into a chicken and egg type thing.

As others have stated you have Oregon, which really seems to be the only one that has translated across 3 coaches.

Every other big time program has had serious ups and down. Is there a program out there with a real Brand other than Oregon? Maybe Ohio State and Florida State?

Texas, Michigan, Tennessee, USC, Bama before Saban, Florida etc all have really lost their way. It's kinds a tough call.

[twistitup]

In some cases sure. But I think it also turns into a chicken and egg type thing.

As others have stated you have Oregon, which really seems to be the only one that has translated across 3 coaches.

Every other big time program has had serious ups and down. Is there a program out there with a real Brand other than Oregon? Maybe Ohio State and Florida State?

Texas, Michigan, Tennessee, USC, Bama before Saban, Florida etc all have really lost their way. It's kinds a tough call.

A program brand can suffer due to keeping bad coaches for too long or bad hiring  (m brown, fat Phil, rich rod, kiffin x2 ) the program brand makes program. A coach pimps out his personal brand yearly for more money- schools can't depend on that.

Oregon made Chip K, not the other way around- or the school suffers greatly when a coach leaves.

You asked about branded programs- I would say Wisc has done a great job. They did not crumble when BB left.

[Cresthog]

You asked about branded programs- I would say Wisc has done a great job. They did not crumble when BB left.

Agreed, I thought about naming them. But then again, it only lasted 2 seasons, let's see how long it does last.

[Hogfly]

You all are missing a key component of Oregon's image.... their cheerleaders. Great googly moogly.

[CattleCorn]

The secret to pushing a brand is interrupting with really loud advertising.  As in :

PETIT JEAN MEATS!!!!!!!!

[jkstock04]

Maybe we shouldn't compare ourselves to Bama, OSU or Texass when it comes to college football.  Nebraska and Oklahomo are closer but still have us with tradition.

My thoughts as well. Those schools have a brand of winning national championships, and lots of em. Arkansas....not so much.

I find it interesting what Oregon has done with their brand. When talking about possibilities what they have done with their brand, I think it is possible that at Arkansas we could do something similar. Anything that could set you apart from all the other middle of the road programs in the nation (like Oregon does) could pay major dividends.

Oregon is as flashy as they come, and I guarantee you every recruit in the nation knows who they are and what they are about.

[sickboy]

I don't really see it. The reason Oregon has been able to build the brand they have is three fold...

One. They run a very progressive, flashy, score at will offense.

Two. They have the best marketing/advertising contacts in the world at their fingertips through their connections with Phil Knight.

Three. They are regionally situated in a position of great advantage. The only other program that's within 700 miles of them and can be considered a "threat" is Stanford. You have Boise State, Oregon State, Washington State and Washington in that circle. In that same mileage circle, roughly... we have Mizzou, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Texas A&M, Texas, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Nebraska, Tennessee, Miss State, Ole Miss... you get the idea. Even if you give Oregon the entire Pac 12 as competition on the West Coast... that still doesn't come close to matching who we regionally recruit against where we're situated.

It would be really hard for anyone outside of Oregon to create a brand like they've created. There's simply too much competition out in the real college football world (East of the Rockies).

[EastexHawg]

Virginia Tech and Maryland have tried the many/wild uniforms thing.  How has it added to their on the field success compared to prior years?

Oregon is one example of a successful college football program with a reputation for wild and different uniforms and people try to not only attribute their success to their uniforms, but claim that the way for other programs to achieve similar success is to copy them.

Meanwhile, they not only ignore that other programs have tried the uniforms approach without similar success...but that there are many more successful programs...some of them more successful than Oregon...that don't change uniforms every time the wind blows a different direction.

Obviously some people want to see what they are claiming to see.

[Cresthog]

I don't really see it. The reason Oregon has been able to build the brand they have is three fold...

One. They run a very progressive, flashy, score at will offense.

Two. They have the best marketing/advertising contacts in the world at their fingertips through their connections with Phil Knight.

Three. They are regionally situated in a position of great advantage. The only other program that's within 700 miles of them and can be considered a "threat" is Stanford. You have Boise State, Oregon State, Washington State and Washington in that circle. In that same mileage circle, roughly... we have Mizzou, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Texas A&M, Texas, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Nebraska, Tennessee, Miss State, Ole Miss... you get the idea. Even if you give Oregon the entire Pac 12 as competition on the West Coast... that still doesn't come close to matching who we regionally recruit against where we're situated.

It would be really hard for anyone outside of Oregon to create a brand like they've created. There's simply too much competition out in the real college football world (East of the Rockies).

Agreed and well said. 

Have you seen gone girl? I really like what happens to the creep in your Avater.

[twistitup]

When I opened with discussion about Oregon, I did not mention uniforms. I don't feel their brand is simply uniforms. The fact is top recruits love to win and recruits find the O program progressive / hip.

I'm not a fan of their uniform situation, but I love they have built a consistently successful program in a less than desirable geographic location. Kids are moving to Oregon from all around the country because Oregon does not supply enough top athletes ( sound familiar?)

[jkstock04]

When I opened with discussion about Oregon, I did not mention uniforms. I don't feel their brand is simply uniforms. The fact is top recruits love to win and recruits find the O program progressive / hip.

I'm not a fan of their uniform situation, but I love they have built a consistently successful program in a less than desirable geographic situation. Kids are moving to Oregon from all around the country because Oregon does not supply enough top athletes ( sound familiar?)

Well, with what Bielema does here, we aren't gonna be progressive/hip in our style of play. Not happening.

With that said, I think at least half of their brand is the flashy uniforms and helmets. Yes, like someone else said it, all that glimmer and glam would look awfully silly if they were to start sucking it up. They don't play well because of their uniforms, but I think a combination of the uniforms with the style of play helps them recruit to infertile recruiting grounds.

My line of thinking is, if you could combine playing style with some glimmer and glam...it could really help with recruiting. I think that brand would be better than a wannabe Alabama. In recruiting, especially recruiting all over the nation....I don't think it helps any if you come across as just like everyone else...I think it is better to somwhow separate yourself, like Oregon has.

[twistitup]

^

With many teams moving to high flying offenses and unique uni combinations - BB has a style of football that will stand out and could be a perfect fit to the right athletes. I disagree when you say BB can't be hip - his offense is becoming very rare these days.

[redeye]

^^^
Red,

And when Bielema leaves? Do we just let the next coach rebrand our program once again?

What Muskogee said.

Isn't there a big difference between a coaches brand and a program brand?

I think the coach creates the program brand and that's the gist of branding a college program.  I'm not sure if any program actually has a real brand on it's own, because it all changes when the coaches leave.  Alabama has long been known as a great football school, but even today, the Bear is still their brand.  You have Switzer at Oklahoma, Osborne at Nebraska, Knute Rockne at Notre Dame, Woody Hayes at tOSU and Frank Broyles at Arkansas.  What would the image of these teams be without these coaches?

When I opened with discussion about Oregon, I did not mention uniforms. I don't feel their brand is simply uniforms. The fact is top recruits love to win and recruits find the O program progressive / hip.

I do think Oregon's brand is mostly uniforms/Nike and that's how they differ from the examples given above.  It also may be why they're the only one without a national championship.  Although I respect what Oregon has accomplished and consider them a very good team, I also see them more like I see Boise State, then any of the other schools I mentioned.

If we wanted something like Oregon has with Nike, the only thing I can think of is some sort of marketed association with Jerry Jones and the Dallas Cowboys, which I doubt would ever happen.  Jones' is probably doing about all he can reasonably be expected to do right now, so I doubt you'll ever see us have Spring practice in AT&T Stadium going head-to-head against the Cowboys, but it would generate attention and probably do wonders for recruiting in Texas.  The whole point being to associate the Razorbacks with the Cowboys, as Oregon has done with Nike.

[Hogfaniam]

^

With many teams moving to high flying offenses and unique uni combinations - BB has a style of football that will stand out and could be a perfect fit to the right athletes. I disagree when you say BB can't be hip - his offense is becoming very rare these days.

Hip as they come

[attachment deleted by admin]