It's one more step away from Cal.  My initial reaction was that it looked horrible, but after taking another look it's not so bad, especially if you look at the picture of the new one by itself and not side by side with what we've all been trained to see as the Bruin uniform.  I've always loved our home uni's, and now our road uni's will be more in sync.  Maybe close up the jersey isn't very good looking (Like most, I really dont like that black outline either), but if the picture above is any indication, it would look good on the field.

how the old ones look.  I think they look sharper.  But I voted for the new one featuring the "true blue" (the offiicial blue of UCLA) because I like the idea of a unified blue.  It's one more step in having our fan section wear a unified blue and looking like a real fan section.  I hate to say it, but ol' $C has a pretty threatening looking fan base due to their obnoxiously unified ketchup and mustard.

We have one of the best and distinctive home uni's in the nation.....The inset stripes are so cool and very unique (really only LSU has them among national programs).  

However, it was tough when both programs were in the tank, I was tired of the "Baby Blue" comments, so I trended toward likeing the navy in the scheme.  However BH and the Boys, not to mention the Den have made our Bruin Blue very cool.

I have always felt for a major program with amazing history and tradition we have the worst identity package in college sports.  How many different shades of blue have we used, navy, midnight, royal, powder, sky........to just name a few.  Then our logo (outside of the block - Basketball and script - football) we have no consistency.....is it the mooing bear one year, then the cartoon  bear the next, then throw in more realistic bear.......what is it?

UCLA should sit down and once and for all outline a cohearent identity package and stick to it.  My vote is that we embrace our Bruin Blue, change the Football road uni's to match our basketball uniforms, and get rid of the Cal navy.  Play up the block and script and settle on a bruin, my preference would be one more fearsome than playful Joe Bruin.  I am not sure how I feel about our mascorts at games......on their own the are really embarassing.........I mean really lame, but in the context of a UCLA game, maybe they work.

The reason we all hated that initial picture from a few weeks ago was because that it was one of those silk screened ones. We like saw onto the other side and everything.
This we get a player in it, it's solid, it's what a player wears.

Excellent, electric look.

About the mascots. I don't know about the guys in the suits but for logos and stuff, I prefer the one we had in the mid 90's that looked off to the side. It looked hand drawn and realistic as opposed to the creature we have now.

As long as they keep the facemasks grey it looks good.  The numbers & trim blend in better with the overall uniform.

While my fandom loyalty lies elsewhere (Alabama), I think the new one is awesome looking. When I think of UCLA, that's the shade of blue I think of.

"Muy Charp" For most of the reasons mentioned above becasue they are more in line with our home uni's. Which are the best looking in all of college football!

GO BRUINS!!!

Now that our road uniforms have been changed to light blue and gold, we need our fans at the Rose Bowl to dress up in light blue garb. Morgan Center should seek a more active role in promoting any gear that is light blue. Ultimately, the entire Rose Bowl crowd should be a sea of light blue with the exception of the visitor side on the north end of the stadium. It can be done. Somebody just needs to take the initiative. Bruin Den is doing an excellent job for the student section. If Morgan Center continues to sit on their ass, perhaps we can start up our own Alumni Den? I have a dream that one day I will walk into a sea of light blue at the Rose Bowl.

A campaign for wearing True Blue. I remember in the Mcnown era the fans had no coordination, it was a sea of random greys, whites, light/dark blues.