Firstly, I have no doubt that the authentic on-field version of the uniform is going to look sharp; however, the replica's sold in the store are probably the lowest quality jersey I have ever seen sold in a reputable store. It was more than pathetic. Unlike the mediocre road/home replica's, the mesh is noticeably cheaper, and the Adidas logo is cheaply screen-printed rather than sewn onto the collar.
UCLA should seriously be ashamed and embarrassed for charging $60.00 for such a piece of junk. Being a proponent of alternate uniforms, and realizing that they are an essential tool in attracting the attention and luring in potential recruits, I am happy that UCLA has explored their many benefits. However, unlike other schools like Nebraska, Michigan, Oregon, and Notre Dame who's fan base's are made aware of their alternate uniforms months in advance through various media events, viral videos, and other social networking outlets.
Maybe UCLA should consider following the aforementioned schools modus operandi for releasing alternate uniforms. How does UCLA generate a buzz about alternate uniforms? Our "brilliant" and "innovative" athletic director mentions them in his little blog that NO ONE reads! (reference to the failed white flag jerseys worn in the 50-0 USC game).
UCLA's cheaply crafted uniforms are hidden away where no one can find them in the back of their student store. You would think that at least they would throw a couple of them on a few manikins, but of course they didn't. All we got was two different conflicting e-mails about when they were actually going to wear the uniforms.
I don't know who is actually in charge of the marketing department, but after years of squandering opportunities to generate exposure for UCLA athletics, it pains me to say that they have contributed to UCLA's irrelevancy in our own city. Their lack of creativity, and inability to accurately keep their own fan base informs leaves myself and many other loyal bruins disappointing with our unprofessional athletic department.