Lacoste, you must do something

[10isfan]

I think Cornet's dress, a Lacoste, looks great. In fact, it has been a long while since I saw anything that pretty. Nike is starting to disappoint. Not sure if the head designer has been replaced, but nothing recent has looked very good. I am also thinking that Bouchard is a bad clothing model. Everything she's worn has looked awful.

 

[Moxie]

Clearly, Lacoste has thrown their hat back in the ring, with so many brands out there, now. I saw this ad in a movie theatre the other day, which obviously they put money behind:

[video=youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeTIHCmyjEM[/video]

 

[Si Si Simona]

Clearly, Lacoste has thrown their hat back in the ring, with so many brands out there, now. I saw this ad in a movie theatre the other day, which obviously they put money behind:

If they target the old rich people they are doing a good job... but they lose a lot of sales to the not so rich but young generations with their old fashion. Its also an ugly fashion to my taste. Nike and Adidas are more like it even if sometimes they make bad designs. Imo, Lacoste got it totally wrong but maybe the quality image is doing the trick. Its hard to believe it does.

 

[Rose]

Nike has got some good players to dress, but they clearly aren't doing the job well lately

 

[sk310]

It totally beats me how the companies choose what the players wear and what their input can be.

It seems to me players who are more interested in fashion (Serena, Maria, Caroline, and Venus when she didn't wear Eleven) have talked about their input in the design of their on court outfits especially for slams.

To be honest I think some of the less glamorous girls just actually don't care on court.

I would guess as someone else said younger players with new endorsements have less say. Although it's pretty blatantly obvious that the brands get behind women specifically that are more attractive players even before they reach the top. It's pretty obvious that Bouchard has been given special attention by Nike because she's going to look great in promotional images. That isn't to discount her meteoric rise.

Also I think there is A LOT more sexist connotations on the way women are dressed fashionably or not based on how they fit traditional views of what is attractive or not.

 

[Si Si Simona]

It only depends on the skill and level of the designers and their bosses. Simple as that.

I.E. - If the current LA Lakers owners are bad (Buss children) then the team suffers by having a bad coach like d'angelo appointed by those inept people.

There is no system or common sense. Its just random by people who decide and may not have a clue themselves. Just like fashion in non sports clothing.

 

[Rose]

Nike hasn't helped Genie any at all. In fact I think they have hurt her. She has natural good looks, but the outfits they have her wearing doesn't even take advantage of that!

 

[Si Si Simona]

Nike hasn't helped Genie any at all. In fact I think they have hurt her. She has natural good looks, but the outfits they have her wearing doesn't even take advantage of that!

Its $ugarova clothes so it doesn't have any room for the front area
Really, Genie is better than $ugarova. She had bad idols like biever and $ugarova but she on her own is better than both of them. She is smarter and has a better character.
She will grow up I am sure Its "that age"...

Its time for her to wear her own line. She is better than $ugar factory. Nike are late but they just follow the mob.
Mob mentality...

 

[sk310]

I think a lot of these companies aren't taking advantage of making these girls better outfits. I don't think it's that hard to flatter most of these girls and a lot of the outfits do them no favors.

I mean even Vika gets crap outfits from Nike. It's like the slap something on her and call it day.

 

[kskate2]

A player's input is also based on their contract. The lower ranked or younger players aren't in a position to have certain guidelines written in the contract. They're probably just glad to have an endorsement deal.

But the top players who care will have a clause in the contract that governs their input or approval for clothing selections.

 

[Moxie]

It totally beats me how the companies choose what the players wear and what their input can be.

It seems to me players who are more interested in fashion (Serena, Maria, Caroline, and Venus when she didn't wear Eleven) have talked about their input in the design of their on court outfits especially for slams.

To be honest I think some of the less glamorous girls just actually don't care on court.

I would guess as someone else said younger players with new endorsements have less say. Although it's pretty blatantly obvious that the brands get behind women specifically that are more attractive players even before they reach the top. It's pretty obvious that Bouchard has been given special attention by Nike because she's going to look great in promotional images. That isn't to discount her meteoric rise.

Also I think there is A LOT more sexist connotations on the way women are dressed fashionably or not based on how they fit traditional views of what is attractive or not.

There is a lot in what you say. Brands will invest in styling players that work as clothes models. And it matters less on the men's side than the women's.

 

[sk310]

It totally beats me how the companies choose what the players wear and what their input can be.

It seems to me players who are more interested in fashion (Serena, Maria, Caroline, and Venus when she didn't wear Eleven) have talked about their input in the design of their on court outfits especially for slams.

To be honest I think some of the less glamorous girls just actually don't care on court.

I would guess as someone else said younger players with new endorsements have less say. Although it's pretty blatantly obvious that the brands get behind women specifically that are more attractive players even before they reach the top. It's pretty obvious that Bouchard has been given special attention by Nike because she's going to look great in promotional images. That isn't to discount her meteoric rise.

Also I think there is A LOT more sexist connotations on the way women are dressed fashionably or not based on how they fit traditional views of what is attractive or not.

There is a lot in what you say. Brands will invest in styling players that work as clothes models. And it matters less on the men's side than the women's.

Right. I mean lets get real. Eugine Bouchard has had a GREAT 6 months but Simona Halep has had an AMAZING 12 months. Which one is better dressed? Which one looks like a blonde young tall thin model and which one looks like a tough as nails athlete? There's such obvious sexism in it. Im not saying a player isn't great just because they're also traditionally beautiful. But why was Ana Ivanovic still being put front an center in Adidas minds when she hasn't been in the top 10 for like 4 years?

 

[Moxie]

It totally beats me how the companies choose what the players wear and what their input can be.

It seems to me players who are more interested in fashion (Serena, Maria, Caroline, and Venus when she didn't wear Eleven) have talked about their input in the design of their on court outfits especially for slams.

To be honest I think some of the less glamorous girls just actually don't care on court.

I would guess as someone else said younger players with new endorsements have less say. Although it's pretty blatantly obvious that the brands get behind women specifically that are more attractive players even before they reach the top. It's pretty obvious that Bouchard has been given special attention by Nike because she's going to look great in promotional images. That isn't to discount her meteoric rise.

Also I think there is A LOT more sexist connotations on the way women are dressed fashionably or not based on how they fit traditional views of what is attractive or not.

There is a lot in what you say. Brands will invest in styling players that work as clothes models. And it matters less on the men's side than the women's.

Right. I mean lets get real. Eugine Bouchard has had a GREAT 6 months but Simona Halep has had an AMAZING 12 months. Which one is better dressed? Which one looks like a blonde young tall thin model and which one looks like a tough as nails athlete? There's such obvious sexism in it. Im not saying a player isn't great just because they're also traditionally beautiful. But why was Ana Ivanovic still being put front an center in Adidas minds when she hasn't been in the top 10 for like 4 years?

But there are a couple of things in play, not just pretty girls who make good clothes hangers, though I agree that's part of it. It's also what brand image is, and who they are pushing. Bouchard is Canadian, which, (forgive me, my friends in Maple Leaf Land,) makes her practically US American. She's got huge selling potential in a couple of big markets, and so she gets a Nike contract. You mention that Ivanovic is with Adidas. Happily for her, they took the Stella McCartney designs, which to my mind are the best and most interesting, along with Venus's. Lacoste is an old-school brand that is revamping its image. Not a bad place to be for Halep, IMO. But yes, as you say, brand contracts are not handed out purely on tennis merit.

 

[sk310]

It totally beats me how the companies choose what the players wear and what their input can be.

It seems to me players who are more interested in fashion (Serena, Maria, Caroline, and Venus when she didn't wear Eleven) have talked about their input in the design of their on court outfits especially for slams.

To be honest I think some of the less glamorous girls just actually don't care on court.

I would guess as someone else said younger players with new endorsements have less say. Although it's pretty blatantly obvious that the brands get behind women specifically that are more attractive players even before they reach the top. It's pretty obvious that Bouchard has been given special attention by Nike because she's going to look great in promotional images. That isn't to discount her meteoric rise.

Also I think there is A LOT more sexist connotations on the way women are dressed fashionably or not based on how they fit traditional views of what is attractive or not.

There is a lot in what you say. Brands will invest in styling players that work as clothes models. And it matters less on the men's side than the women's.

Right. I mean lets get real. Eugine Bouchard has had a GREAT 6 months but Simona Halep has had an AMAZING 12 months. Which one is better dressed? Which one looks like a blonde young tall thin model and which one looks like a tough as nails athlete? There's such obvious sexism in it. Im not saying a player isn't great just because they're also traditionally beautiful. But why was Ana Ivanovic still being put front an center in Adidas minds when she hasn't been in the top 10 for like 4 years?

But there are a couple of things in play, not just pretty girls who make good clothes hangers, though I agree that's part of it. It's also what brand image is, and who they are pushing. Bouchard is Canadian, which, (forgive me, my friends in Maple Leaf Land,) makes her practically US American. She's got huge selling potential in a couple of big markets, and so she gets a Nike contract. You mention that Ivanovic is with Adidas. Happily for her, they took the Stella McCartney designs, which to my mind are the best and most interesting, along with Venus's. Lacoste is an old-school brand that is revamping its image. Not a bad place to be for Halep, IMO. But yes, as you say, brand contracts are not handed out purely on tennis merit.

Of course there are many things in play. I was never suggesting otherwise. But you prove my point even more. Eugine Bouchard DOES have huge selling power but its not because she's Canadian it's because she's a pretty lithe blonde girl. The American market is huge but Americans are stingy about who they claim. They wouldn't claim a Canadian just because it's a country close to the US.

If your theory were correct than Sloane would have gotten a Nike contract when she had a fairly meteoric fast rise instead she got Under Armor. Why? She's an American girl.

 

[Rose]

It totally beats me how the companies choose what the players wear and what their input can be.

It seems to me players who are more interested in fashion (Serena, Maria, Caroline, and Venus when she didn't wear Eleven) have talked about their input in the design of their on court outfits especially for slams.

To be honest I think some of the less glamorous girls just actually don't care on court.

I would guess as someone else said younger players with new endorsements have less say. Although it's pretty blatantly obvious that the brands get behind women specifically that are more attractive players even before they reach the top. It's pretty obvious that Bouchard has been given special attention by Nike because she's going to look great in promotional images. That isn't to discount her meteoric rise.

Also I think there is A LOT more sexist connotations on the way women are dressed fashionably or not based on how they fit traditional views of what is attractive or not.

There is a lot in what you say. Brands will invest in styling players that work as clothes models. And it matters less on the men's side than the women's.

Right. I mean lets get real. Eugine Bouchard has had a GREAT 6 months but Simona Halep has had an AMAZING 12 months. Which one is better dressed? Which one looks like a blonde young tall thin model and which one looks like a tough as nails athlete? There's such obvious sexism in it. Im not saying a player isn't great just because they're also traditionally beautiful. But why was Ana Ivanovic still being put front an center in Adidas minds when she hasn't been in the top 10 for like 4 years?

But there are a couple of things in play, not just pretty girls who make good clothes hangers, though I agree that's part of it. It's also what brand image is, and who they are pushing. Bouchard is Canadian, which, (forgive me, my friends in Maple Leaf Land,) makes her practically US American. She's got huge selling potential in a couple of big markets, and so she gets a Nike contract. You mention that Ivanovic is with Adidas. Happily for her, they took the Stella McCartney designs, which to my mind are the best and most interesting, along with Venus's. Lacoste is an old-school brand that is revamping its image. Not a bad place to be for Halep, IMO. But yes, as you say, brand contracts are not handed out purely on tennis merit.

Of course there are many things in play. I was never suggesting otherwise. But you prove my point even more. Eugine Bouchard DOES have huge selling power but its not because she's Canadian it's because she's a pretty lithe blonde girl. The American market is huge but Americans are stingy about who they claim. They wouldn't claim a Canadian just because it's a country close to the US.

If your theory were correct than Sloane would have gotten a Nike contract when she had a fairly meteoric fast rise instead she got Under Armor. Why? She's an American girl.

I don't think we Americans are stingy about who we claim! We are just looking for anybody from anywhere that can play tennis. That being said I've become concerned that Genie's playing level is going down not up! And the Nike outfits look bad on everyone that I have seen!

Ana is still out in front because I have never seen her in a tennis outfit that I thought she didn't look good in