Rumor: Nike looking to be next Michigan outfitter

Submitted by DISCUSS Man on

Apparently this guy is an MLive writer. Rumor that i've just heard of. If so whoawhoawhoa.

 

Hearing that Nike may be Michigan's new sponsor.

— Mark Cavitt (@DeportesAddict) December 24, 2014
MGoBoard
Football

Alton

December 24th, 2014 at 1:36 PM ^

Yes, Nike "may be" Michigan's next supplier after the contract with Adidas expires.  Also, Adidas "may be" Michigan's next supplier.

What will happen is that as the contract gets closer to expiration, Michigan will solicit bids.  The company with the best bid will be Michigan's next supplier.  End of story.  Since we haven't solicited bids yet, we don't know what the best bid will be, and therefore we don't know who will be Michigan's next supplier.

Everything here is speculation with zero basis in real information.  Of course Nike is going to place a bid.  But nobody knows who will place the best bid, and anybody who claims that they do know is fooling you, or is fooling themselves.

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 13273

MGoBender

December 24th, 2014 at 1:42 PM ^

It's funny to me how much people care about this.  I don't understand how one can let whether Michigan wears Nike or Adidas affect their lives so much.

Joined: 03/26/2010

MGoPoints: 15128

Filipiak1

December 24th, 2014 at 1:57 PM ^

I only wear Nike athletic shoes because of comfort and quality. I like to wear Michigan fan gear. So wouldn't it make sense that I would prefer and enjoy Nike to supply my favorite team apparel? It's also a fact that the majority of kids - young adults are wearing Nike and not Adidas. My sons U10 basketball team all is wearing Nike along with every team they play against. It's safe to say that players prefer Nike over Adidas as well.

Joined: 12/28/2013

MGoPoints: 1104

mackbru

December 24th, 2014 at 2:08 PM ^

Thank you for saying this. It's unbelievable that people care who makes the uniforms -- especially since it's the school that makes the ultimate call on what it will and won't wear. And at this point, post-Brandon, it seems unlikely the school will venture too far from the traditional looks. As long as the team improves, I'd be happy if Underoos makes the uniforms.

Joined: 09/01/2009

MGoPoints: 34104

kscurrie2

December 24th, 2014 at 1:45 PM ^

Michigans downfall can be traced back to the switch to Adidas. Also, the two best teams in the Big10 were Nike. Also the 4 teams in the first college playoff all wear nike.. Something to make you think.

Joined: 11/22/2010

MGoPoints: 3241

Filipiak1

December 24th, 2014 at 1:51 PM ^

Nike as outfitter and Jim Harbaugh as new head coach. I would have gladly traded the years of torment for this had I known it would turn out this way!!!! Hip hip hooray!!!!

Joined: 12/28/2013

MGoPoints: 1104

Auerbach

December 24th, 2014 at 1:51 PM ^

To anyone who doubts that the mayers prefer Nike over Adidas....

Does anyone recall the reports from when Brandon met with the team right after RR was fired but before Hoke was hired which said that the players broke out in a "Nike, Nike!" chant, to which Brandon replied, "Sorry, I dont break contracts." I bet there's a reference to it on this site if someone has time to search for it.

Joined: 12/15/2014

MGoPoints: 841

CoverZero

December 24th, 2014 at 2:00 PM ^

WTKA was saying yesterday that M will lose some money by scrappin Adidas.  However, those Adidas unis just looked odd right from the start.  The switch was just before the RR error and the numbers and fit of those things have been ugly ever since.  Go Nike!

Joined: 08/30/2014

MGoPoints: 14571

allintime23

December 24th, 2014 at 2:07 PM ^

So you're saying we'll be winning again soon? Fuck it, I'm in. I've been an avid Adidas supporter but I roll with michigan plus that'd be sweet to see zoom soldiers on the basketball team.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 15225

ErikDPT

December 24th, 2014 at 2:20 PM ^

Would a switch back to Nike allow M teams to use the old (less highlighter-y) maize again?  I thought I remember Nike having trademarked that exact shade of maize and was the reason why our maize changed around the time we became outfitted by Adidas.

Joined: 04/09/2013

MGoPoints: 528

Alton

December 24th, 2014 at 2:36 PM ^

That seems to be a common belief among a certain segment of the Michigan fanbase, but you can't trademark a color (with some exceptions, such as identifying the source of a product, like Owens Corning pink).  Since Maize is not associated with Nike, they can not claim a trademark.

 

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 13273

ErikDPT

December 24th, 2014 at 2:42 PM ^

It's something I've seen stated on the boards a few times (if it's on the internet, it must be true).  So Adidas does not have any claim to the old jersey colors?  I always felt the notion of an apparel company claiming the official colors of a university ridiculous.  

Joined: 04/09/2013

MGoPoints: 528

Alton

December 24th, 2014 at 2:53 PM ^

Yeah, the orange-yellow that people associate with the '70s uniforms, the bright yellow associated with the '90s uniforms, and the even brighter yellow associated with the 2010s uniforms are all in the public domain, and any supplier can use them for any school--Michigan or Delaware or Purdue or whomever.

 

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 13273

Bando Calrissian

December 24th, 2014 at 6:06 PM ^

Someone should probably tell the athletes, then... From the Daily:

"Nike also copyrighted the color “Maize,” so Adidas actually had to make a new version of our school color, now known as “Sun” (which the volleyball team has affectionately dubbed the “highlighter” jerseys). While the switch has become progressively easier throughout the past two years, it’s come with growing pains."

http://www.michigandaily.com/content/lexi-zimmerman-and-courtney-fletch…

Joined: 07/02/2008

MGoPoints: 68117

Alton

December 24th, 2014 at 10:51 PM ^

Someone should absolutely tell the athletes, if they are under that impression. 

If Nike has this trademark on the color Maize, then why does Michigan claim that their colors are Maize and Blue?  Wouldn't Nike be able to sue them?  Wouldn't Nike also be able to sue Crayola for including a "Maize" crayon in their 64-packs?  Sorry--it makes zero sense that Nike has the copyright for a color that Michigan had been using for 100 years before they hired Nike. 

Sorry--it makes no sense, no matter who claims otherwise.

A good explanatory article:  http://freakonomics.com/2011/08/12/can-you-trademark-a-color/

("But the general understanding in American law is that colors can only be trademarked if they serve—and only serve– to identify the source of a product.")  In other words, John Deere might have a case against a tractor company who paints their products green & yellow (because somebody might buy it thinking they are getting a John Deere).  But there is no identification in the public mind between Maize and Nike.  So they can't trademark it, any more than they can trademark Burnt Orange or Carolina Blue. 

 

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 13273

tlo2485

December 24th, 2014 at 2:56 PM ^

I don't care that much about the company we use, but on a related note, I did notice all of the younger kids in my family wanting their sports clothing gifts to be oregon. (I live on the east coast)

Joined: 08/06/2010

MGoPoints: 7429