Skip to content

Kentucky Sports Radio

University of Kentucky Basketball, Football, and Recruiting news brought to you in the most ridiculous manner possible.

Is this a new “thing”?


(photo via @UniformCritics)

Seemingly always chasing the athletic giant Nike, the ever-unpopular Adidas brand has done it again. Responsible for countless eyesores on the playing surface across athletics, like the Zumba uniforms, the “W’s” versus the “N’s” game, or the Baylor highlighter wardrobe. This time with a little less Technicolor, but still off-the-charts tacky.

Pink. That’s right. Pink football jerseys. If there is anything more manly than a hard-nosed SEC football game, please fill me in. And if there is anything less manly than a Pepto-Bismol inspired jersey, again, let me know.

It is important to note that this is only a concept from Adidas for breast cancer awareness (like we aren’t aware of cancer yet, anyway) and does not necessarily mean Mississippi State or any team will wear these.

Here’s to hoping somebody will get through to Adidas to tell them what a horrible idea this is.

The NFL has added pink accessories for such an occasion, and the MLB does as well, including pink bats. But an entire jersey? The only way I see this as acceptable is if we’re talking about a woman’s team. But what do you think?

Article written by Stuart Hammer

B.S. Broadcast Journalism from the University of Kentucky. @StuartHammerKSR

26 Comments for Is this a new “thing”?

  1. Wild Turkey 101
    1:05 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Men for breast cancer awareness.

  2. Azyzz
    1:11 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Stuart, how old are you?

  3. SH
    1:19 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Stuart, there’s no one worse at this than you.

  4. Adam
    1:21 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    I’m all for BCA jerseys but it would be better for pink trim or just wearing pink gloves/cleats.

  5. JB
    1:32 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    There are about a hundred different angles you could have taken to address your dislike of these uniforms, but the “pink isn’t manly” angle is low hanging fruit. Look, if the team wants to do this, and the players are fine with it, then it should be supported by all fans.

  6. Pink
    1:33 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Why so much breast cancer awareness when there’s thousands of other deceases and cancers just as bad?

  7. Pink
    1:34 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Short answer…$$$$$^^^

  8. RC
    1:41 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Stuart, you are way off with this one..”like we aren’t aware of cancer yet, anyway”..

    Any vehicle to raise awareness and fundraising for research of cures for this awful disease is ok with me. The irony of the best male athletes wearing pink for the cause just brings much needed attention.

    I think you should attend an American Cancer Society event like Relay for Life (as we did Friday night), spend some time with survivors or those who have lost someone to cancer, then take another try at this post.

  9. lesigh
    1:42 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    #6 It’s a cause celebre. People feel good supporting the cause, so they donate to this rather than other equally worthy causes. Don’t get me wrong, it needs support, but so do many, many others. At least MLB has prostate cancer fundraisers. Also, manly or unmanly, pink is ugly–ever damn shade of it.

  10. Truth
    1:43 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Sorry Stuart, a SEC Football player isn’t so insecure about his sexuality to worry about being seen wearing pink. If you’re concerned to even see these men wear pink, it only projects yourself.

  11. stuart
    1:50 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    yea, lets raise more money for pharmacy’s to “research” breast cancer while they sell IV’s of chemo for 20 grand a piece, they lose money if theres a cure

  12. I agree
    1:56 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    with Stuart on this one. Not necessarily from the “pink isn’t manly” standpoint that he’s chosen, but on the point that everyone already knows what cancer is by now. Everyone has a family member or friend who’s been affected by this horrible disease, myself included. That being said, you would think breast cancer is the only disease worth talking about for these people. When’s the last time you saw someone wearing pink jerseys for Alzheimer’s, ALS, Parkinson’s, Multiple Sclerosis, etc, etc? Pure and simple: it’s all about the $$$. Follow the money trail, and you’ll figure out why we have a whole month dedicated to a single disease that has one of the lowest mortality rates of all types of cancer.

  13. Wildcat Brian
    2:14 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    all this is is a PR move. By coming out with these awful looking concepts but for a good cause, it has us talking about it. That’s exactly what adiddas wants. I highly doubt anyone will actually wear those.

  14. thisis
    2:26 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    this is probably the single worst writing I have ever seen on KSR. It is not only for awareness people, it also goes to fundraising. Sorry that you have to see grown men wear pink. WAH WAH WAH it isn’t stereotypically manly and I want to watch manly football. Well I want to stop watching people die from cancer so shut you mouth stuart.

  15. UKBlue
    2:30 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Everyone at Adidas should be fired for making all of us have to look at the the disasters they create. Who ever came up with the idea of lets see who can come up with the ugliest things possible as a marketing idea so people will talk about it should be allowed to be punched in the face as many times as possible.

  16. MoneyWasted
    2:33 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    I am for cancer awareness. I just think this is a gimmick. What if everyone and every institution donated the money they spent on buying all the pink stuff for games were to donate that directly to research or helping fund treatment centers for the non/underinsured? Got no problem with wearing a pink ribbon, or pink decal or something. Just think the money could be better used.

  17. UK GUY
    2:35 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    What most people don’t realize is that a high percentage of the funds that are collected by the BCA do not go towards researching breast cancer treatments and cures. It goes into the fund raiser’s pockets.

  18. Sheeple
    2:35 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    8 and 14 You guys realize that even if a cure was discovered it would never be used right? There is no money in a cure. The money is in awareness and fundraising, and treatment. Also for every dollar you give for a cause 75-90 cents goes in somebody’s pocket. Susan G Coman is a mutimillionaire. She sure as hell doesn’t want a cure.

  19. thisis
    2:44 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    #18, I realized susan G Coman isn’t a good charity, but I do believe that a cancer cure is quite attainable. A company that actually finds a cure would be set to gain so much from it that they’d be stupid not to use it. I still believe enough in humanity to think that if a breakthrough was made, human beings would be decent enough to help each other out.

  20. Are you serious?
    2:56 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Susan G Komen* is actually dead. Lost her life to break cancer, and is therefore not a multimillionaire. The ignorance on this page is real. That money goes to help millions of people fighting breast cancer around thec country, not the pockets of those who founded the NON-PROFIT organization.

  21. Chaz
    3:20 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Have to defer to Aerosmith: “Pink is my Favorite Colour”, “Dude looks like a Lady”, “Eat the Rich”.

  22. @KrisShera
    3:22 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Stuart, this was just a bad effort on your part and your comment has clearly offended a lot of people. I’m sure that you really don’t think that awareness and support for cancer research is a bad thing, but I’m not sure what you were thinking by writing that.

    There is a lot of ignorance floating around this comment section. I busted my ass for 10 weeks to raise money in a competition with other candidates to support the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, an organization that supports new discoveries in the treatment of blood cancers. I was UK Markey Cancer Center’s candidate, I won BTW. I’m also a lymphoma survivor.

    Yes, there are some bad charities out there, CNN just published an expose on the worst. But there are good ones too, use Charity Watch or Charity Navigator to find a good cancer research charity to support. There are also good charities out there, like the LLS.

    Had I been diagnosed with lymphoma as little as ten years ago, I would have had a 40% chance. Thanks to a drug called Rituxan, supported by LLS research funds, my chances were bumped up to 80%. I made it, some people still don’t, so we need better treatments. Within the last 10 years, we have been able to CURE some types of blood cancers, using drugs like Rituxan. The pharma company that produces Rituxan still has no problems selling this drug to people with a type of lymphoma that it can CURE. The notion that big pharma is withholding a cure is extremely cynical and just false.

    CURES are possible, but it takes time, and a lot of money. Physicians and research scientists likes their jobs, but they have to get paid. Their facilities are very high tech and they need money to purchase the equipment and keep the lights on. Cancer research is EXPENSIVE, thats shy pharma companies need to charge a lot for the medication. Humana was billed 15k for each one of my chemo sessions that included 5 different drugs, one of which was discovered in the blossom of a flower that is native to Madagascar. So when you consider that researchers really are searching the world over, you could maybe understand a little better why it is so expensive.

    Another interesting thing to note is that many blood cancer drugs are being found to be effective for other types of cancer, and the same can be said for breast cancer drugs. SO by supporting any research, you could be potentially helping many different people with many different types of cancer.

    I believe that in my lifetime we will have a cure for most cancers.

  23. Jordan
    3:44 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    “But what do you think?”

    That you’re a little sexist, bud.

  24. 20 are you serious??
    3:47 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    Your ignorance is unreal. NON PROFIT organinzations books are pulic record. Go look up their books. Usually about 10%-20% of all money collected goes to the acutal cause. The rest of that money goes to pay the salaries of all the people that work for that organization. Some of those salaries are 6 and 7 figures. Then there is advertising and materials to promote the cause, all that costs money. So get off your high horse you sheep.

  25. Block Party
    4:09 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    a) People and their conspiracy theories . . . smh.
    b) Am I the only one that knows there’s a difference between Zumba (exercise routine) and Zubaz (tacky apparel from the early 90’s)?

  26. Really?!
    4:52 pm June 16, 2013 Permalink

    This is honestly disgusting.
    Yes, there are bad charities, but there are many good ones. Small tokens of awareness for many different causes or communities are incredibly common in sports (small pink items in the NFL for breast cancer awareness, days for Veteran recognition, Latino nights in the NBA, etc. etc.)…and because you think pink isn’t manly…you think that is wrong?

    This is so gross.