Louisville resigns with adidas - 5 yr $40 million
Louisville resigned with adidas with a 5 year $40 million dollar contract. The $8 million per year is the third largest collegiate apparel deal and puts them just under the $8.2 million per year Michigan makes from adidas. Pretty surprising number that adidas paid for Louisville after letting Notre Dame walk to Under Armour for 10 years and $90 million (although the Under Armour deal includes an option to take payment as stock as well) and Tennessee to Nike for far less than $8 million per year. Going to be interesting to see what Michigan decides to do when their contract is up in 2 years.
April 17th, 2014 at 10:54 AM ^
Who makes the Dominos uniforms? Just askin...
April 17th, 2014 at 11:47 AM ^
If true, let's get and1 in the mix so we can see THE PROFESSORRRRRRR take on Caris one-on-one at promo events.
April 17th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 10:54 AM ^
Prediction for two years from now: We get a lot more money from whichever apparel company we choose and some people bitch if it's Nike and other people bitch if it's adidas.
April 17th, 2014 at 10:56 AM ^
New Balance
/blue hair swag
April 17th, 2014 at 11:34 AM ^
Idk, Saucony is a bit more hipster. Brandon might switch to drive up attendance amongst the students to fill in the seating. or Mizuno for the M connection??
April 17th, 2014 at 12:33 PM ^
Or Warrior for the M connection. I still can't believe that make all this hockey gear and even the Liverpool jerseys these days.
I mentioned this below too. It'd be great if they had a full line. I'd love to see M in Warrior
April 17th, 2014 at 12:13 PM ^
CMU had New Balance up untill a few years ago.
April 17th, 2014 at 10:59 AM ^
If we walk away from adidas, I think we will be leaving money on the table. None of Nike's apparel contracts come close to that. Tennessee just left adidas for under $4 million per year. If adidas offered Louisville $8 million per year, I have to imagine Tennessee got a similar offer.
April 17th, 2014 at 12:27 PM ^
Coaching multiple sports gives me an opportunity to see/compare what brands are worn and preferred by the largest percentage of teen athletes. Far and away Nike carries the most weight in this particular market. Their brand and swoosh have become synonymous as 'the standard'. Although this seems superficial to the majority of us adults the kids not only care, but in most cases it factors into their decision. I'm not saying it is a make or break deal in all cases but I think most of us (especially those of us without teenage kids) would be surprised how much 'the brand matters' talk truly comes up either in everyday conversation or social media.
Financially, Adidas is easily the best choice. However, if you want to reinvent/reestablish a culture of success, currently, nike is the brand carrying the most pull. Like it or hate it.
Having that swoosh gives your program the leg up and Nike damn well knows it.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:01 AM ^
Ralph Lauren or bust
April 17th, 2014 at 11:07 AM ^
British Knights needs to come through with an offer.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:49 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:58 AM ^
I will only accept their offer if the soles of the shoes light up maize and blue.
April 17th, 2014 at 10:58 AM ^
Prediction: Adidas ponies up some serious cash and we resign with them before the end of 2015.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:04 AM ^
Unless our athletic department is fed up with adidas, I think we are going to end up resigning with them.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:09 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
The ripping issue seems like it has been fixed. It was an issue in 2011 - 2012. I don't recall seeing any ripped jerseys this past year (2013- 2014). Football is a violent game and jersey tears aren't outside the norm. It did seem like 2011 had a few more than usual. 2012-2013 basketball was bad but this last year I didn't notice any rips.
Adidas is debuting a color that is closer to maize (see the maize practice jerseys) soon too.
Honestly I think people put way too much into the whole nike vs adidas vs under armour thing. Hell the NFL wore rebok up until 2 years ago.
Also is that your German Shorthaired Pointer in your avatar? Nice looking dog.
April 17th, 2014 at 12:14 PM ^
Nike equipment never fails!!
April 17th, 2014 at 12:34 PM ^
Clearly a faulty product model that since these incidences (at least to my recollection) has not been worn by the guys who wore them before.
As bad as these tears were, oddly, the outcry against nike lasted like an entire week. When it happens to Adidas the anger that ensues lasts for years.
April 17th, 2014 at 10:58 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:02 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
But I think it was in the $2-3 million range.
I think Alabama or UNC has the largest current Nike contract at around $3.75 million per year.
EDIT: I think I may have misinterpreted that. Texas has the largest Nike contract netting around $5.56 million-$5.76 million per year when you combine apparel product and cash. Different sites have different numbers posted, but I think you get the idea. Nike is paying the biggest schools around $4-5 million per year.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:43 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:56 AM ^
adidas and other apparel companies have to overspend and outbid to compete with Nike.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:59 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 12:10 PM ^
Alabama and Tennessee both signed with Nike just a couple months ago for far less (in the $3.5 to $4 million range). I would argue both of those schools are worth more than Louisville.
I would not be surprised if Tennessee actually turned down a larger offer from adidas to go back to Nike.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:19 AM ^
It was about $3.5M per year, IIRC.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^
In 1994, Michigan had $5.7 million seven-year deal with Nike. Kind of an interesting article to read even if it is four years old.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/pac10/2010/06/lucrative_deals_with_nike_adid…
April 17th, 2014 at 11:08 AM ^
I think Michigan shoud go with Reebok, FILA, or FUBU.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:11 AM ^
You do realize Reebok is owned by adidas now?
April 17th, 2014 at 11:20 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:36 AM ^
Both of you guys have the same moment as your avatars. Weird.
But I am more of a puma guy myself. Hell, maybe DB can work out a deal that replaces the puma with a wolverine? Or A block M as the M in puma??? huh?
April 17th, 2014 at 12:20 PM ^
From when MSPaint used to dominate the site.
You are a true arteest, sir.
April 17th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:14 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:19 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:23 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:37 AM ^
you can pretty much pencil in adidas right now. Nike has not shown any signs that they are willing to pay like adidas, and this Louisville deal shows that adidas is still going to shell out the cash. I had some doubts about adidas' willingness to pay for collegiate apparel contracts after ND and Tennessee left adidas earlier this year, but this news proves otherwise.
April 17th, 2014 at 11:42 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:52 AM ^
Just a step above twitter or text messages. I feel bad for anyone who feels the need to proofread or spellcheck a message board post. I would understand if the post was completely unreadable, but cumong man. Wait, can I not write "cumong man" either?
April 17th, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
April 17th, 2014 at 11:53 AM ^
have to believe that with Nike or Under Armour Michigan would sell considerably more merchandise than they do with Adidas,When you buy a Michigan jersey, Michigan gets just a small sliver of the proceeds (in the neighborhood of 5%). The rest goes to Adidas. That's true for all apparel deals. The school doesn't get that much from royalties even if it sells a ton. When we set records for merchandise sales, when the Fab Five were here, our royalties were only a couple of million dollars. It's the money up front that's much more lucrative.