AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Washington is now an Adidas school (dropped Nike)
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
DrunkRalphie
Well-Known Member
**** 'em.
Less than 1/3 of that, iirc.
CU is a couple years into a ten year deal that was signed prior to the 2016 season. Bad timing. Best we can hope for at this point is to get the football program back into the national spotlight and work the system like UW did. Their timing was perfect.
CU doesn't have a national (or even regional) brand that means anything. Nike probably couldn't give two ****s if CU left.
Adidas ****ing sucks, though. Should have gone UA.
I hate Nike, but the other two options are terrible.
That was what I was hoping for too.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Market cap & P/E
UA <$7B, 46.9
Adidas $42B, 30.7
NIKE $108B, 62.1
Why would anyone want CU to go with the smallest, riskiest partner?
UA <$7B, 46.9
Adidas $42B, 30.7
NIKE $108B, 62.1
Why would anyone want CU to go with the smallest, riskiest partner?
You’re concerned that UA won’t be around in 10 years?
Tell me why MLB has a new contract with UA for up to 11 years beginning next year?
Deleted member 807
Guest
My concern isn’t that specific or dire for UA.
It’s basic due diligence to scout out the financial position of business partners and sponsors before inking multi-million deals. Go with whomever is in the best position to market your brand.
UA could double and double and double again, while still being just a fraction of Nike.
I’m simply stating that the company with the deeper pockets, the bigger distribution network, the more experienced design team, and access to the highest quality/lowest cost manufacturing are all considerations.
I’d feel better about UA if they were HQ’d in Denver or in P12 country instead of Maryland.
SeanMSan
Well-Known Member
I’ve always preferred Nike as far as athletic brands go, so I’m pretty sold on Nike. I’ve been hit and miss with Adidas (thanks Fuskers), and have dismissed all things UA. Those three seem to be the major players in big time college athletics. Do Puma and New Balance outfit any colleges? They seem to be creeping up in topflight soccer in the rest of the world.
It was a big shocker to see Miami go to Adidas after a decades long relationship with Nike. As far as I can remember Nike has been a major supplier or outfitter of CU. I do remember the Russel Athletic jerseys back in the day.
Hell, resurrect Russel and Champion and leave shoes brands to shoes.
It was a big shocker to see Miami go to Adidas after a decades long relationship with Nike. As far as I can remember Nike has been a major supplier or outfitter of CU. I do remember the Russel Athletic jerseys back in the day.
Hell, resurrect Russel and Champion and leave shoes brands to shoes.
Deleted member 807
Guest
The Sports Authority contract at Mile High was 10 years. They signed in 2011 and were bankrupt by 2016.
Not saying UA is at risk of bankruptcy, but long term contracts don’t always correlate to a firm’s long term viability.
DrunkRalphie
Well-Known Member
I tend to like Nike products for the most part. The child labor practices make me hesitant though.
I wasn't even looking for this. It just happened to come up in my iPhone News app feed just now.
Business Insider:
Teens are abandoning Under Armour in droves — and it's turning into a huge crisis for the brand
24th? I'd say that does not bode well for the long term prospects of the company.
I believe that Russell still has 1 school under contract. lol
I've never fit properly in Nike running shoes. Ironic, given their origins. Turned me off of the brand for a long time. I'm fine with their clothing now - as long as they keep out of the headlines for child labor law violations in the far east as compared to everyone else.
CitizenKane
Well-Known Member
Those of you that were here when CU signed their deal know that you don't want to get me started on this topic. Go read the thread about CU's deal, then find news articles about deals signed since CU inked theirs and you'll know that CU couldn't have gotten a worse deal if they had tried.
I've always been a Nike guy, I just like their products more than the others.
Deleted member 807
Guest
It takes two to negotiate a deal. Sounds like one side did more homework than the other.
I love Nike and I understand CU has been with them forever (although that didn’t really seem to matter to them) and UA/adidas make some garbage looking uniforms but multiple schools have just told them they want to keep their same uniforms that Nike made and just change the logo on it so CU definitely could have done the same. That is simply too much money to pass up but I could definitely see the other companies offering similar money so we won’t really know.
newkid
Member
Most of this doesn't really matter for CU or most non top tier programs. Nike doesn't bother marketing smaller programs beyond their contractual obligations. And if you have a small contract, those obligations are bottom barrel. Their having more resources doesn't mean much when they don't spend them on you. Neither does their larger and most experienced design team do most schools any good. Nike, because it's Nike, is the most restrictive of all the brands. That's how you end up with stuff like this:
Furthermore, when Nike comes out with new stuff, they tier all of their programs. Oregon and the top 5 or so get first dibs. Then the next group. Everyone else gets put on a years long wait list. You might be eligible for a pair of gloves that Oregon wore last year in 2020.
They don't care about most of their partners because they don't have to. If UA folds in 10 years, which it won't, you just negotiate with someone else.
BTW While it's true that UA HQ is in Baltimore, their tech offices are in San Francisco, and their footwear design studios are in Portland.
Last edited:
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Russell realy brought their A game with the lambie shoulder pubes.
Did they replace the macaroni?
Deleted member 807
Guest
I see you making a case against Nike more than you are making a case for UA or Adidas.
It comes down to how much a sponsor is willing to spend for CU wear their apparel. The more a program wins, the more fans buy stuff and the more money sponsors are willing to throw at programs.
CU isn’t going to get UDub amounts of money or special uniform deals from Nike, Adidas or UA by missing out on bowl games.
Mobetter Ws = Mobetter $$$
newkid
Member
Yes, I'm making a case against Nike, not for UA. But I'm willing to bet that either Adidas or UA would have given CU more than Nike.
Deleted member 807
Guest
I’m not sure you’d win that bet.
Didn’t UA and Adidas have an opportunity to make CU a better offer? And if they did extend a better offer, then wouldn’t internal policies require that CU should accept the best deal?
There is no need to speculate because the market has spoken.