<p>According to ABC News, when you watch the opening ceremony next week, the blue and white outfit worn by the male athletes cost almost $2,000 with shirts costing $420 and the female almost $1,500 with skirts costing $498. Is this the best way to spend on our donations? OK, the athletes deserve it. Cannot they not at least find clothing made in U.S. for this price to showcase our athletes?</p>
<p>Also, the uniforms are ugly. Especially the berets. And the athletes kind of look like they’re in the Coast Guard – not that this is a bad thing, but it’s kind of confusing.</p>
<p>You can buy ugly clothes for a lot less money. I wish the USOC had done so.</p>
<p>Also, you could buy stuff that looks identical to most of those items off the rack for a lot less. But if it was all donated by Ralph Lauren, what does it mean to say how much it “cost?” Does that just mean that it’ll cost me $125 if I want to buy a tie like that one?</p>
<p>~The price per outfit is absurd.
~The logo for the company should not be featured, and instead a patch with USA, a US Flag or similar identifier.
~The Ralph Lauren Company should recompense by donating some of their profits. They are getting FREE advertsing to a world-wide audience.</p>
<p>Embarrassing. It seems American companies would compete to have the athletes wear THEIR uniforms–for free. (I don’t really like the style, either–looks too “military.”)</p>
<p>What a ripoff! Those price tags usually mean “designer stuff made in the US or Italy”. I have no idea why RL Olympic designs are so deliberately ugly. The uniforms say, “here comes the police force of the world”! Ugh. Yuck. Well, at least the pony logo got somewhat toned down - LOL.</p>
<p>I know, its Canadian. But isn’t the purpose of the Olympics to promote good will among different countries? I think its okay that our uniforms are made elsewhere.</p>
<p>The logo looks really tacky.
Who decides these things?
I agree awful decision all around.
Uniforms should have been made in USA. Are you kidding me?
If have to go with hats - then baseball caps!
Blue blazer white pants? How avant garde! Going for the Thurston Howell III look I see. Even have the scarf! That ought to do wonders for the perception that Americans are arrogant. Not.</p>
<p>The woman athlete in the photos looks silly, wearing crew socks and sneakers with her job-interview jacket and skirt and faux-military beret. She looks like she’s pretending to be three different people at the same time: one from the neck up, one from the knees down, and one in the middle.</p>
<p>Obviously, no athlete is going to risk messing up her feet by wearing women’s dress shoes at the Opening Ceremony. But couldn’t they have given the women pants so that the fact that they’re wearing comfortable non-foot-wrecking footwear would be less conspicuous?</p>
<p>Also, I’m not absolutely sure, but doesn’t the woman’s jacket button the wrong way? It looks as though it buttons in the same direction as the men’s jacket, which is, of course, wrong.</p>
<p>^ Warning the photos in that search may not be work safe. They feature some very skimpy men’s underwear. </p>
<p>That said, there is clothing made in the US, American Apparel comes to mine. As for the design, if they have to wear a hat I prefer the beret to the cowboy hat. And honestly, the ugliness of Opening Ceremony outfits helps make it fun to watch!</p>
Going for the Thurston Howell III look I see. Even have the scarf! That ought to do wonders for the perception that Americans are arrogant. Not.</p>