Notre Dame Switching to Under Armour
Includes this little bit at the end: "When Notre Dame signed the deal, it was the top priority for adidas, but things changed when adidas began providing shoes and apparel for the University of Michigan in 2008. The deal that gives the Wolverines $8.2 million in cash and equipment annually is the largest deal in all of college sports."
I'd take UA over adidas. But I am no Dave Brandon.
Would you take less money over more money?
Of course not. But I was just speaking as personal preference. I think UA has better quality clothes and equipment and is gaining more of the market every quarter.
God, if Haines offered $10million per year for our players to walk about in maize and blue skivvies, DB would at least have a sit down with them.
"Hey, which team are we on?"
this is quickly devolving into an AT&T commercial.
why wouldn't the contract come with a dinosaur that could transform into a robot and then chop the water like the karate ninja?
Who wouldn't want a dinosaur that transform into a ninja and karate chop the water?
I also want to start my new year revolution.
Which is better a big tree house or a small tree house?
Yes, that's why they should have stuck with Nike. Michigan was the poster child for Nike during the late 90's. You couldn't walk into a sports store around the country without seeing Michigan gear everywhere. That has not been the case with adidas and their marketing has been weak.
Michigan's status as "poster child" for Nike during the late 90's had more to do with Michigan than with Nike. Michigan was coming off the Fab Five era when they started with Nike in the mid-90's, before any of the scandal associated with that era was known. They were also (gasp!) winning football games and were still considered a powerhouse in the conference and nationally. While the basketball program appears to be back on track, football is, at best, a middle-of-the-pack conference team and has been for some time. How can any company market a program as top notch when the results plainly don't support that?
Moreover, during the Fab Five years we wore Russell Athletic uniforms. They sold better than any Nike version we wore later on.
Nike, Adidas . . . it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. It's the product on the field/court that makes a difference, not the brand of jersey they wear. If a team is successful, it will move merchandise.
Looking forward to chicken skin graphics with blood spatters.
I was going to say that this was the first time I was jealous of ND, but we just made one of the best hires of the offseason, so to hell with them.
Don't blame them. I am convinced that nothing truly great is going to happen in michigan sports until Adidas is gone. ND just got rid of one major obstacle to success. Adidas curse man.
Hasn't the basketball program gotten a lot better since the switch? Ellerbe and Amaker were when we were under Nike.
because we didn't win the Sugar Bowl and hoops didn't play for a 'ship wearing Adidas.
Bowl-sugar schmole, Adidas-schmididas. That is all.
It's all about the shoes?
it's GOTTA be the shoes, right?
Not sure I'm familiar with this "Notre Dame" of which you speak. Is that the team that had a clover on its helmet, or the one with the angry-drunk lepruchan on the helmet?
No no no, they're the ones that don't wear helmets at all, just golden Christmas ornaments with face masks attached.
Will Auburn still be the top school for UA?
It will remain the Temple Owls.
Isn't it Maryland? The founder is an alum if I'm not mistaken.
You are correct. Under Armour founder, Kevin Plank, is a 1996 graduate of the University of Maryland. He was also on the footbal team and was captain of the special teams for two years.
It probably helps that both of their logos are UA
is AU. GOLD, Jerry, GOLD.
Yeah I'm sure the old guard of their fanbase (average age 58) will be thrilled when they come out looking like Maryland next year. This is a team that only wears names on their jerseys once a year and now UA is gonna do some crazy stuff with their unis
Auburn has kept their traditional look.
What is this bizarre obsession with apparel deals? Talk about the ultimate who cares subject.
Our program hiccup coincidentally happened the same when we switched from Nike to Adidas, and MSU's upward hiccup also coincidentally occurred when the went to Nike.
No, MSU has been a Nike school for a lot longer than that. They wore Nike when they had Bobby Williams and JLS.
Also, I buy tons of shit and want it to look good.
What little is known thus far is over at ESPN (LINK):
"The University of Notre Dame will switch from wearing adidas for all its team sports to Under Armour when the current deal expires at the end of the school year, multiple sources told ESPN.com. Terms of the deal, which is expected to be signed in the very near future, are not known."
Supposedly, Kevin Plank - the CEO of Under Amrour - was going to be in South Bend today.
In other ND news, Davaris Daniels is going to be suspended for this semester, and is considering not returning. http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10270226/davaris-daniels-notre-dame-fighting-irish-suspended-academic-issue
Edit: Well, now he's saying he fully expects to return in the summer, but an earlier report said he was going to explore his options.
That will hurt them!
suspended him for it? Last time I checked they booted their starting QB, their basketball team's leading scorer, and now their best receiver for cheating/not making grades. I'm no ND fan, but I don't see a lot of other schools doing that
I have no real rationale since it's all based on pure hatred.
I saw notre dame and automatically assumed something awesome was going to happen in our favor.
Why in the world would they mention Michigan in the press release? They sound like an insecure girl that breaks up with a guy because she thinks he will always love his ex more than her.
Because we are their biggest regional rival and they must compete with us in some form or fashion.
Because we are their biggest regional rival and they must compete with us in some form of fashion.
Fixed that for you
No, you really didn't.
Oh wait, you totally did!!
Purdue(well now axed), MSU were more important rivals than us.
"“We really need our apparel partner to embrace that concept and to treat us differently. It sounds selfish but it’s just about being a national brand. There’s one approach when you’re primarily a regional brand and a great regional brand, but we’re not. We’re a national brand and need a partner who can help fuel that.” - Notre Dame AD
This probably means that Michigan will go with Nike or Adi, with UA not being an option in 2016. Notre Dame wouldn't let Michigan one-up them again. The rivalry continues off the field...
I'm not a big fan of Adidas, but I think we all need to give up the idea that Adidas is somehow going to get out bid, ecspecially with them losing Notre Dame. They will one up any offer Nike makes and as you said UA is probbly out of the question. Even if Nike did offer more, we didn't leave Nike solely because of money.
Michigan's switch to Adidas in 2007 wasn't because of money as Nike was willing to match the dollar offer. Adi made concessions that Nike wouldn't, which tilted Michigan towards Adi. The sports marketing climate was also different back then which motivated Adi to take a major team from Nike, and Michigan was it. The climate will obviously be different when the current contract is up and this ND-UA deal will definitely have an influence.
but I thought we invoked the child-labor and/or unfair labor practices Nike was accused of as a reason. Adidas had a more "PC" brand...
Love the avatar, btw.
nike and adi factories and labor practices are not that different - they use similar materials in similar labor markets at similiar cost. adi made promises that nike couldn't and wouldn't make (see section 8 of the sponsorship agreement now that it's been made public).
Students certainly have protested over that, but I don't think there is any evidence that it influenced the AD's negotiations with Nike in any way.
I thought it was because Nike owns the rights to the color "Maize".
All I read was that Notre Dame switched just because of an inferiority complex. Well good for them, I hope they feel important. Now the only thing that would make this even funnier is if Adidias somehow copyrighted their gold and blue.
...interesting. You don't picture ND as a UA school. Too traditional.
I could see them going to Nike, but not UA.
Whatever, I hope this means Adidas gets their shit together with Michigan.
#1 - Our jerseys shouldn't tear...EVER! Test them on Cincinnati or something before sending them to us. We're not the testers, this is MICHIGAN, fergodsakes.
#2 - While I love our MBB uniforms, they shouldn't be the same template as the other Adidas schools. Customize them. Tastefully.
#3 - We are not a school that participates in your attention whoring promotions. If you want to put sleeves on basketball jerseys, go for it...but leave Michigan the fuck alone.
#4 - Keep the UTL as a home alternate in historical games (if we want to wear them), figure out a way to do the same for the aways that don't make us look like bumblebees. Keep the block M on the front of both...and no other school gets to break the rules with a block letter on the front of their uniform. If we wear them, we wear them, if we don't, we don't. But we know what they are if we do...like the other green uniforms for ND. 4* jerseys, that's IT.
#5 - *The only exception if there has to be one...bowl games. That said, it should still be tasteful and MGoBlog approved.
UA can do traditional when required. See: Auburn. It's the same damn thing, home and away, that Auburn has been wearing for decades. And it looks just fine. The colors are even accurate, which seems to be far too much to ask from an apparel manufacturer.
It seems to me, based on what I've seen out of UA, that they are far more interested in giving schools a unique identity that reflects their campuses and schools, while Nike and Adidas are interested in brand-wide projects (Pro Combat, the Adidas camo template for the tournament, etc.).
But, hey, what do I know. It's all about what you can market, brand, and tap for revenue, garish , off-color, non-durable uniforms be damned.
...and when they DO change, I actually like some of them .Like I hope NW keeps their uni scheme for a long long time. I hope Maryland keeps it's flag helmet.
anyone who thinks our product on the field is affected by who makes our uniforms is delusional. A good team would be a good team wearing pretty much anything.
Edit--not counting those basketball jerseys that ripped apart. Those were embarassing.
for $1 more than ND. Trolling at it's finest.
While uniforms maybe similar, UA heat/cold gear is superior to whatever Adidas tries to pass off as the same. I hate Adidas, always have so I'm bias to the nth degree.
I anticipate a major problem.
Under Armour's greatest pride is the 'state flag' helmet:
Notre Dame is in Indiana:
The colors do not clash with ND. All seems to be falling into place.
IU has already claimed the Indiana Torch of Many Stars look.
Options for modifying helmet:
I'm sure Under Armour will come up with something perfect.
I remember when my great grandfather chopped down trees while his pet Buffalo practiced steeplechase in the backyard. Times were simpler then
This is like something that EDSBS would put up as sarcasm.
I've mentioned this before, but going to adidas has just been awful. During the 90's and early 2000's Michigan was the poster child of Nike. They were the Oregon back then, minus all the crazy jerseys. Some of the younger followers might not remember this. You couldn't walk into a sports store all over the country without seeing Michigan merchandise there. That has not been the case with Adidas. Tell me the last time you've seen Michigan in one of their commercials? They were everywhere with Nike. So, I hope for a change and to be honest with you I like what Under Armour has done with Northwestern.
You are mixing cause and effect. We were hugely popular before we signed with Nike, and over the course of the Nike contracts (1994-2007) our popularity waned. Not many people rocked the Ellerbe-era basketball jerseys.
To the UA "There's More Than Corn in Indiana" alternate unis
I've come around on UA. Maryland got what they got because they wanted it. So did Northwestern, with very impressive results. Look at what they do with Auburn, managing to give them the exact same uniform they've had for decades, as well as a Ditka sweater for Malzahn.
Adidas gives us highlighter yellow, WE ON and WE variation basketball warmups that come off as silly, chinsy merchandise that doesn't hold up, basketball jerseys that rip, football jerseys that fit too tightly to be used, "legacy uniforms" with bumblebee stripes, and the look and feel they give to everyone else.
ND is right to demand something that is actually unique to them and their identity, instead of the same shit Adidas pushes on all their schools (the camo templates for basketball and football, etc.).
At some point, the apparel contract money is only so important when the product the apparel supplier puts on your teams is lackluster. They may have promised us the moon, but the Adidas experiment has been nothing other than a misstep.
but no team sponsored by Adidas has won a national championship in football since Tennessee in 1998...
Have fun sporting some of the worst shoes ever made.
UA is a great apparel company. Their shoes, however, are trash.
But we are getting getting a little over 8 million from Adidas. osu is getting a little over 3 million from Nike. C.R.E.A.M.
ND doesn't want to be locked into a deal with just one apparel company. They are going to sign a deal for 6 games with one and then a series of home/away uniforms with other companies. They don't consider themselves a one uniform brand school but rather they are a national uniform school.