OT: On the Adidas/Nike Issue

Submitted by Blazefire on March 24th, 2011 at 10:43 PM

It's clothes, people. Friggin... AHG! Nike makes clothes. Adidas makes clothes. I have never had an article of clothing from either of these companies fail to meet the requirements to which I held it, which were, "Cover my ugly body up." The jerseys are Maize and Blue in either case. The designs are acceptable in either case. The corporate logos are secondary in size and location to the rest of the design in either case. Wearing one or the other brand is not going to cause our teams to perform any better, nor make your fat ass any more attractive when you wear the year's latest sideline polo.

To sum up: Nobody cares what you think about clothing manufacturers, and I'm tired of having it interjected into the middle of half the threads I open.

Comments

VictorValiant

March 25th, 2011 at 2:52 AM ^

it is a 8 year contract. 3 years done, 5 to go.  a next contract needs to be signed in 4 years.

 

the OP has absolutely no idea what goes on beyond the scenes.  i don't expect him to know, but it's not as simple as bidding for a logo on uniforms.  like others have said, it ABSOLUTELY affects recruiting, so it does MATTER.

rbgoblue

March 24th, 2011 at 11:16 PM ^

Listen, Adidas and Nike are both reputable clothing/shoe companies.  Both create products for major soccer, football, basketball, and baseball teams around the world.

Adidas recognized that Michigan was an elite athletic department, and offered them the highest apparel contract ever to a university.  The contract stated that Michigan was always going to be #1 for Adidas, and if any other school received a more lucrative deal from Adidas, Michigan's deal would be made greater than that.  Additionally, Adidas showed respect for Michigan's tradition and allowed them to have a say in the uniform design process.

Contrast that with Nike, whose existing contract with Michigan was very middle of the road compared to the other top schools they had signed.  Ohio State's contract was more lucrative than Michigan's.  Nike had complete say in the design process.

It seems like one company recognizes Michigan as the best, and the other hardly cares.  I don't understand the outrage with the company that not only recognizes Michigan's importance, but also backs it up financially, in favor of the company who has never done anything special for Michigan in the past.  All over a stupid logo?  In other words, don't complain about your wife who is a 9 for the girl who is a 10 and doesn't even know your name!

cigol

March 24th, 2011 at 11:19 PM ^

My only problem with Adidas is that for some reason, the powers that be have changed our school colors from Maize and Blue to Highlighter-Yellow and Blue.  Let's face it, Nike is sweeter.   All of the top athletes wear it.  Nobody cares about quality running shoes in the world of college football.  If the players want it, and better times are remembered with the swoosh than the stripes, then they should go back. 

 

 

Section 1

March 24th, 2011 at 11:23 PM ^

I think it is untrue.

What is true is that Michigan's "maize" has morphed through about 20 Pantone changes through the decades.  But there wasn't any brand-specific change.  Look through all the color images you can find.

We do have a kind of a highlighter "maize" now.  It has been heading in that direction for years and years.  It photographs better, and shows better on television.

TheHoke.TheHok…

March 25th, 2011 at 12:59 AM ^

Agree.

You can really see it with the student section t-shirts.  The new ones are so bright they're almost green.  My nike student tee from a couple years ago is a much more maizy yellow, though still not quite maize.

BlueDragon

March 24th, 2011 at 11:20 PM ^

and all the other construction projects, I'm all for it.  Can we also argue about the best way to set up our running game next year?  I loved re-reading all the old arguments from the last few years in the "Let's Not and Say We Did" thread.

dnak438

March 24th, 2011 at 11:27 PM ^

 

I don't know what this allegiance to Nike is all about.  Adidas was willing to go the extra mile to accomodate the University's terms and also gave more money.  What's so great about Nike?

Frankly, Nike annoyed me with their "Football is everything" commercial.  It was totally antithetical to what the University of Michigan is all about: leaders and best not just on the field, but in the classroom and in the community too.

Plus, by buying Nike you're bankrolling Phil Knight and Oregon football.  I'd rather see the Ducks win the Pac-10 (or 11 or 12) than USC, but still.

sterling1213

March 25th, 2011 at 12:00 AM ^

If Adidas is so much worse than Nike than somebody better tell the NFL. Since they wear rebook which is owned by Adidas. My guess is that they wouldn't want their million dollar players out there in inferior equipment.

house of pain

March 25th, 2011 at 12:19 AM ^

Actually Nike will be the uniforms of the NFL starting in 2012. I think a lot of the preferences that kids have for Nike over Adidas is that it can be a culture preference. All of th freshest kicks that young teenagers where are Nike. Whether they are Air Force Ones, Jordans, Dunks, or Air Maxes. It ain't cool rockin' a whole sweatsuit of Adidas with a pair of Nike shoes. Plus, as much as us UM fans don't like the Oregon uniforms, many kids love how they have many different unis. Even if they do use their uniforms as marketing tool.

natesezgoblue

March 25th, 2011 at 1:16 AM ^

almost no one under the age of 25 willingly wears adiddas shoes.  Ugly and uncomfortable.  Nike sets the trend when it comes to american sports.  If I was a prospective scholarship athlete, particularly a basketball player I would hate to wear adiddas.   

Maizedout1982

March 25th, 2011 at 2:12 AM ^

I love Nike! I am not "Fond" of Adidias, but i have spent over 5k off stuff from the Mden and it is all Adidias. If it has MICHIGAN on it, i am wearing it. I live down south, so i always have something with MICHIGAN on. I think we all grew up on Nike and wanting to "Be like Mike". I am pretty sure that we all grew up on "the Swoosh". Am i right or wrong? I always thought Adidias was for soccer a player...sad, huh. Here is the deal, if Adidias is with MICHIGAN, i am rocking it. If you do not like Adidias, do not buy it. Nike has terrible "Running Shoes"....more like God Awful, but i do have some "Pro Combat" stuff and that appeals to alot of recruits. I would like to see the "Tech Fit" stuff and have been trying to contact Adidias and the M-Den to see when this jersey will be available to the public. 

 

So,Michigan is still Michigan and it will always be The Mazie and Blue!!

 

GO BLUE!

antidaily

March 25th, 2011 at 9:56 AM ^

The future MVP of the NBA is an Adidas man, D Rose.

Last year's nation champs were fucking Under Armour. Click clack, bitches.

I don't really give a shit either way, but Nike makes better college Ts. Adidas selection is piss poor. Nike used to have about 25 M shirts on their site. Adidas has 2 or 3 items total. That's shit. 

The Nike NFL thing scares me a bit. It's like the SEC being played on ESPN. 

Dirty Chicken

April 19th, 2013 at 1:18 PM ^

I think Michigan should support the colors Maize and Sky Blue. I think it's pretty, and should wear it in honor of homosexuals around the world. GO SKY BLUE! (: