Nike: Rumor is $10m/year + other tidbits
I'm getting tired of the Nike threads too, but this was pretty good to get to work today. Most athletic administrators (ADs down to interns) subscribe to a daily news blast called "D1 Ticker"...today Michigan was atop the ticker.
Michiganis headed to Nike in a deal that will commence in 2016 & could be worth over $10m per year once full details of the contract are released, comes amid reports that adidas offered an historically-large & long agreement that the Wolverines passed-up to ink with the Swoosh, cash component would be significantly larger than what Nike is paying it's next largest partner in Florida State's $4.4m & would dwarf that of Big Ten foe Ohio State, UCLA will likely be the highest-paid brand in the adidas portfolio - link, link
I'm interested to know what Adidas offered, but if nothing else...Michigan flexed it's muscles against the other major Universities (when it comes to apparel - if it actually accounts for anything in your opinion).
Note: Not sure if the links work, but the blurb is what I was looking to share.
I highly doubt that we're getting a significantly larger amount than Florida State. I will believe it when I see it.
If so, Nike is setting a precedent to pay all of it's bigger clients significantly more.
It will be significantly higher than what FSU gets today.
Who gives a fuck about Florida State outside of Florida? Michigan has fans across the country and around the world.
Though I loathe using the word, the Michigan "brand" has a lot more value and cachet than almost any other school.
Agreed... in terms of "sexiness," Texas, USC, Michigan come to mind. Just look at our helmets!!!!!!!!
Plus Harbaugh. Everyone wants in on Harbaugh.
And now probably UNC because of Jordan and their colors.
Maize, Burnt Orange, Carolina Blue are all real even outside of athletics. People know what those terms mean even when discussing items completely unrelated to sports.
even in Florida. Florida is very much what have you done lately. Fans change their allegiances regularly to go with whoever is winning (unless it is USF). In the 80's it was all the "U" then FSU, then Florida...so on and so forth. There are few hardcore devoted fans down here. Perhaps its the distance, I am sure the closer you get to each of the schools the more loyal the fanbases are, but from where I am it takes approximately 2.5 hours to get to Miami, 2.5 hours to Gainesville, and 3.5-4 hours to Tallahassee and the situation is very fluid. I see more Ohio State fan gear then I do FSU.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
The only school in that group who would warrant a larger offer with this news is Ohio State. FSU and Alabama are nowhere near us in terms of apparel sales. To be honest, the only school that rivals Michigan in terms of apparel sales would be Notre Dame.
They are just behind Texas and we are third.
"This is a coup for Nike, which will now have the top-three selling college brands in its fold. According to a release last August from the Collegiate Licensing Company, Texas led the nation in licensed merchandise sales, while Alabama was second and Michigan third."http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/2015/07/06/michigan-picks-nike-for-new-apparel-deal/29783671/
Considering there was less fan support over the last couple years, I can't imagine we will be third for very long.
Start winning and we will climb to one or two.
Which has always been our traditional position.
"Less fan support" at Michigan still equates to over 100,000 people at every home game. There's probably 5 or less schools who could pull in over 100,000 people when they're good, let alone slogging through their worst decade of football in years and years
Very rarely in life are you paid what you're worth. You're paid what you can negotiate.
We've proven to Nike that we will go get that money if one of their competitors dangles it in our face. If they wanted Michigan back in the fold so badly, they were going to have to make the deal sweet enough to pull it off.
I'm sure there are piles of market research that back up the deal too. Michigan brings a whole bunch of customers to the table that places like FSU simply don't. It will be interesting to see what OSU does when their contract comes up.
EDIT: Oh, and it probably helps that we have an Uber high profile football coach who will now be donning the swoosh everywhere he goes.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
is almost ten years old. FSU was the highest in large part because they signed their contract last year. Prices are going up. Texas will surely be #1 when their new deal is done.
They can't even fill their modest sized stadium. Florida State may be valuable to these companies, but Michigan is far more so
That might be true in Cali, but I'm in Texas and I see more FSU gear than Michigan gear. Of course I've been seeing damn near as much MsU gear lately, but like others have said... that should change when the wins start to normalize
I see more Ohio State than Florida State gear...in Florida.
FSU is a one-sport school that comes in and out of national relevance. I've never thought of FSU as a national brand compared to, say, ND, OSU, Texas, etc. They're just good at football.
It's not just FSU, I only mentioned FSU because they have the most lucrative contract with Nike.
Michigan's new rumored contract would be more than double what Nike is paying FSU, Alabama, and OSU.
I understand that Michigan is a national brand, but the contract would be paying 2.5X Nike's current highest contract. I just don't see them paying that.
What is this opinion that there is no way we could possibly get a bigger deal than FSU based on? Either way it's wrong. FSU may be a top SEC football power but their fanbase and global brand recognition is smaller than Michigan's. They're more regional. As logos go, Block M beats a native Americans head every time.
I said SIGNIFICANTLY higher. I am conceding that MIchigan's new contract with Nike would be higher.
Like I said to another poster...I only brought up FSU because they're Nike's largest contract. Alabama, and OSU are also Nike schools that make less than FSU.
Can we make Hackett a statue yet?
That's why he isn't going to be AD. Once his replacement is announced he'll run for the White House.
One link took me to an article about the Women's World Cup. And the other to the FREEP. But that D1 Ticker sounds pretty sweet.
For every Nike thread, I'm going to make a "could a _______ eat Charlie Weis" thread.
That being said how is Texas not Nike's number one payout over FSU?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
It is a matter of when it was done. My guess is FSU redid their deal more recently than Texas and leveraged their MNC and Heisman winner in the negotiations. I'm not sure when our deal comes up with Nike, I imagine we will get more than now. More than you? Depends on if we continue to do well on the filed perhaps get another NAMNC and a Heisman winner.
Even though it has been tarnished some, Michigan is still a very recognizable brand, and the colors, when the maize is done correctly are nice on other clothing, like polos. A scarlet polo even with the gray swoosh, makes you look like a Target Associate. Your blue is a deeper shade of blue, so you likely don't get confused as being Best Buy employees.
I have to believe having Harbaugh as coach strenghtened Hackett's hand in these negotiations. Michigan does sell a lot of merchandise and is a national brand, but having a coach who has energized the fanbase and is pretty much a one-man publicity magnet has to help.
I'm not going to lie... this whole deal has made me a bit uncomfortable because we all know Nike does not pay as well as other companies. Nike seems (and I use the word seems because I've heard so many different things) where they gain too much control in what the team wears (as in alts/uniformz). I know the AD & team are supposed to sign off on the changes but it makes me wonder if those sign offs are suspended due to stipulatons in the apparel contract where alts are required in so many games & play offs, etc.
We also know Nike has far bigger contracts with certain schools. I am really interested in hearing the exact details. I am seriously hoping it isn't a case of, "We'll give you x amount more over FSU and OSU but here's the catch". I also hope it comes to light what Adidas offered, not just money but the other terms as well.
to know what Adidas offered. I have a sinking feeling that we left A LOT of money on the table by signing with Nike. I hope I'm wrong.
A "sinking feeling" you say? Do you believe we are headed into financial ruin due to our choice of apparel company? Take a xanax.
I really don't care all that much about the apparel contract. I would just hate to see them make up the lost revenue by raising ticket prices or by putting ads in the stadium.
That said, if you're passing out xanex, I'll take two. Thanks.
Good point. I don't think that'll happen though. Debrandonization is proving too popular for the brass to relapse.... I think.
must have offered more than Adidas was currently paying us. Adidas might have offered more than Nike, but I think that the AD would have needed an increase over the present contract in order to sell Nike to the Regents. The AD has taken on a lot of debt over the past few years for stadium and facility upgrades
Whatever money we left on the table, don't you think it's more than offset by the fact that we'll sell way more Michigan merchandise now that it's provided by a brand that the youths (and most people in general) overwhelmingly find more desirable? It also doesn't hurt that Michigan gear is now attached to one the world's premier global marketing machines. The prolifigate media presence and energizing effect of Harbaugh on this fanbase and (hopefully) the return to winning ways reinforces the likelyhood of merchanise revenue increases. The Harbaugh effect will likely also increase the quantity and value of corporate sponsorships and raise ticket prices (hopefully just on luxury boxes) if only due to an increase in demand. This long term, year over year revenue growth. Really not worried about the money. Hacket is a business man and I trust that he ran the numbers and determined that the cost of switching to Nike was well worth the financial, intangible brand appreciation and recruiting benefits. He didn't just say "well the kids seem to like it!" I have a feeling Nike paid pretty handsomely to get their swoosh on prominent football celebrity Jim effing Harbaugh's shirt as well as on the uniforms of an ascendent Big 10/National power.
won't be complete unless the UM AD and/or JIm Harbaugh tell Nike to stuff it when they propose a continuing stream of stupid alternate unis. if we continue wearing clowniformz designed by incompetent, no-talent apparel designers at the same time we've given up the significantly more $$ that Adidas was willing to give us, it will hardly be a bargain.
"Debrandonization." It implies reprogramming the minds of former acolytes and eliminating all traces of the past regime. And it's more humane than the way they do it in North Korea because there is no execution by mortar bomb or death by starved dogs. Novus vocabulum.
Now I want our maize back, Nike.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Xanax? Share the land. Haven't had one of those in a while.
We did just fine before Adidas. There were a few schools who played in January this year that did ok without top ranked apparel deals as well.
Winning cure's all. Even if we left $5MM on the table per year (very unlikely), winning some BCS games will have donor checks dwarfing that in short order.