• The KillerFrogs

So about the Nike cleats we used for the game..

michael1999

Active Member
[quote name='Daniel '02' timestamp='1294241896' post='742014']
fish_shark_SNL.jpg


Candy-gram?
[/quote]


Daniel, the picture won't come through. I want to see it.

Happy 100th post to me!
 

fanatical frog

Full Member
Yes, there is truth to it and it has been discussed in some other threads. The shoes were a major fail on the soft RB turf, and TCU did not bring back up cleats, according to Erin Andrews during a sideline report talking abou the slipping of TCU players.

Can't believe a team would have left itself open to not being able to have the right shoes or cleats for those conditions. Shoes are not something to experiment with. They are, I think, the most important piece of equipment a player wears. Any other piece of equipment you can adjust to if new, but the shoes have to be right.

I'm tired of Nike and their BS uniforms and their failed cleats.


In F-R-E-A-K-I-N-G spades. I hope we've learned our lesson with Nike.
 

gdu

Active Member
The dimensions of this Epic Fail by Nike are just stunning. I mean, you publically wheel out a 'New Shoe with new, improved Super Cleat Technology!' only to see the team you have shod in them look like a bunch of comedy performers sliding around in the mud. On the highest rated Bowl game so far. With literally millions of potential customers watching.

That is Epic Fail.

I mean, did'ja think about maybe sending a few guys out to check and see how the cleats/shoes were working? How the traction held up in the typically wet conditions of the Rose Bowl? Maybe even going so far as to have back-up cleats/shoes available if necessary? After all, it is your product and reputation on the line. I will fault our equipment personnel to the degree that they should have made sure there were replacement cleats, but in the end, this was a Nike show. Perhaps there were contractural arrangements that only allowed Nike product out there, or that only allowed Nike to make replacements. I don't know as yet. But the onus was on Nike to look good by seeing to it that we looked good running circles around Wisconsin shod in Nike cleats. Instead, we were slipping and falling shod in Nike cleats.

Epic Fail, Nike.
Not sure how many times I have to say this before somebody actually read, and comprehends, it: I still haven't seen 1 single person who actually wore Nike's new cleats slip. All of the Frogs I saw slip were wearing the same cleats they have worn all season and some last season: nike carbon vapors.
 

sous vide

Member
...

If there is only 1 thread on every hot topic, they will all stay on the first page. If people post stuff willy nilly, good topics with robust dicussions get pushed to page 2 where no one apparently checks and then another thread on the same topic gets started. And then that repeats 4 or 5 times and all you have is junk on page 1 and good information pushed down. ...

Picture of gdu...


Efficiency_Expert.gif


 

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
Not sure how many times I have to say this before somebody actually read, and comprehends, it: I still haven't seen 1 single person who actually wore Nike's new cleats slip. All of the Frogs I saw slip were wearing the same cleats they have worn all season and some last season: nike carbon vapors.

Well, genius, I don't have the obvious benefit of a roster of who exactly is wearing what footgear. All I know is: 1.) Nike rolled out New, Improved Super Cleats, and graciously deigned to allow our players to wear said New, Improved Super Cleats. 2.) TCU players were slipping and falling all over the place during the game. Ergo, 3.) The fabulous New, Improved Super Cleats were blithering failures, not gripping the turf worth a flip and damned near losing us the game.

Now, whether this was the case or not, my point was that NIKE SHOULD HAVE MADE SURE THEIR PRODUCT LOOKED GOOD BY INSURING THAT WE LOOKED GOOD. If we went out and slipped and flopped over many times, the perception would be that the Nike gear was worse than worthless. As you can see by the reactions here and elsewhere, this perception has taken hold. The onus to avoid this was on Nike, considering that it was their product and their technology, and most damagingly, their reputation that was on display.

Whoever was responsible for this epic fail should have their severed heads up on pikes in front of the Nike Marketing offices as a suitable example.
 

zfrawg

Active Member
It is just as easy for you to search as it is for me to search for you. You want me to do your job for you too? Make your frog club donation? Pick up your kids from school?


I personally think the search feature sucks so I rarely use it. And I agree with most, stop being an [Craig James] to fellow frogs. Be nice have fun...
 

TopFrog

Lifelong Frog
Well, genius, I don't have the obvious benefit of a roster of who exactly is wearing what footgear. All I know is: 1.) Nike rolled out New, Improved Super Cleats, and graciously deigned to allow our players to wear said New, Improved Super Cleats. 2.) TCU players were slipping and falling all over the place during the game. Ergo, 3.) The fabulous New, Improved Super Cleats were blithering failures, not gripping the turf worth a flip and damned near losing us the game.

:rolleyes:

How many more times does this have to be explained and pointed out?
 

gdu

Active Member
Well, genius, I don't have the obvious benefit of a roster of who exactly is wearing what footgear. All I know is: 1.) Nike rolled out New, Improved Super Cleats, and graciously deigned to allow our players to wear said New, Improved Super Cleats. 2.) TCU players were slipping and falling all over the place during the game. Ergo, 3.) The fabulous New, Improved Super Cleats were blithering failures, not gripping the turf worth a flip and damned near losing us the game.
As they say, ignorance is bliss.
 

ross

KMA
The only player I have talked to so far (a DB) said in his opinion the cleats were not the problem, the field was just really slippery and we were flying around much faster than Wisc.
 

Cougar/Frog

Active Member
The only player I have talked to so far (a DB) said in his opinion the cleats were not the problem, the field was just really slippery and we were flying around much faster than Wisc.

Eureka!!!! Only TCU players slipped and fell because Wisconsin players were just sooooooooooooooo slow.......


Anyway, it is still Nike's problem because the national perception, based upon the broadcast team, is that TCU's players were falling because of shoes, not the field.


So, if it was the fault of the field, we would blow out slow Wisconsin by 30 on artificial turf, where our guys did not fall every time they tried to make a move???
 

TopFrog

Lifelong Frog
The only player I have talked to so far (a DB) said in his opinion the cleats were not the problem, the field was just really slippery and we were flying around much faster than Wisc.

Ross, what if they had been able to change out shoes or cleats (since it did appear the shoes they were referring to had molded bottoms).
 
So, if it was the fault of the field, we would blow out slow Wisconsin by 30 on artificial turf, where our guys did not fall every time they tried to make a move???

I don't think it would have been by 30, but we would have comfortably beat Wisconsin on artificial turf. We had several key drives killed (and they extended several drives) because of slippage. That's in addition to the fact that artificial turf plays to a lot of our strengths.
 

TCUFrogs

New Member
Now I'm going to do my best to be as nice as possible here because I know this forum makes you feel multiple times more important than you actually are in real life and I'd hate to stir the pot up too much on my own teams forum with fellow fans, but although I'm capable of searching, you seem to not be capable of taking out whatever is stuck firmly up your [Craig James], maybe that's why you're such a dick to anyone who doesn't lick the players jock straps after they're done using them in order to post the inside scoop on KF.c. Just an observation. Now I know you're competent and a smart guy, but I'm going to repeat what I said anyway just to make sure you didn't miss anything. I said I wasn't sure if this had been mentioned yet and that I had been in LA with no internet access previously at the JW. So I guess my question here is, why you felt it to be necessary to reply to my post referring to information (5 full threads of it apparently) that you planned on simply not linking a fellow frog to when they apologized for posting an invalid thread and asked for the link to the information you referenced and instead reinforced the notion that you're an [Craig James]-hat that intends to help some of the time but try to talk down to fellow frog fans who are asking honest questions other times? But for someone who I've seen do this multiple times to others and averages around 10 posts a day, maybe the lack of fresh oxygen is getting to you.


Bravo! +
 
Top