OT: UCLA leaving Adidas for Under Armour

Submitted by Wolverine Devotee on

The hits just keep on coming for Adidas.

They're getting dumped by everyone.

In the last few years, these teams have left-

  • Michigan
  • Notre Dame
  • Wisconsin
  • Tennessee
  • UCLA

http://www.bruinsnation.com/2016/5/23/11758290/uni-watch-ucla-expected-…

Now adidas is left with Kansas, Indiana, Nebraska, Miami, NC State, Arizona State, Texas A&M, Louisville and Mississippi State.

In other words, Nike vs Under Armour is the real battle now. Wouldn't be surprised if Adidas eventually pulls out of college sports.

MGoBoard

OwenGoBlue

May 24th, 2016 at 12:29 PM ^

They really blew it when they acquired Reebok and shuttered the Reebok football gear in favor of Adidas, which has never had much credibility in the sport. They basically left Reebok with hockey and assumed they would gobble that marketshare in other sports with all Adidas gear. Whoops.

Joined: 04/03/2016

MGoPoints: 31535

ypsituckyboy

May 24th, 2016 at 10:23 AM ^

They're just not cool any more.

As a related aside, anyone else wear adidas indoor soccer shoes around during midddle school or early high school? Maybe it was just the kids I hung around with (nearly all of whom played soccer) but I seem to recall that was a fad at one time.

Joined: 06/22/2009

MGoPoints: 30512

sum1valiant

May 24th, 2016 at 11:08 AM ^

This probably isn't going to be very popular on the board, but Adidas is making a pretty big comeback in the "cool" category amongst high schoolers. The Adidas Tiro pant was probably the single most popular apparel item amongst high schoolers in 2015, with pop culture celebs Pharrell and Kanye pushing them to the forefront. Adidas football apparel and design may be junk, but they're certainly not unpopular with kids. I should add that I work in the sporting goods/apparel industry.

Joined: 09/01/2009

MGoPoints: 13025

sum1valiant

May 24th, 2016 at 1:17 PM ^

It's tough to determine how their apparel sales are truly performing, as everything that's reported to the street included TMAG, and the golf industry as a whole is an absolute tire fire. However, all earnings reports indicate very strong softlines sales and profitability despite the struggles in the golf industry.

Joined: 09/01/2009

MGoPoints: 13025

Lionsfan

May 24th, 2016 at 10:27 AM ^

You forgot to mention how UCLA just got the largest apparel deal in history.

 

Joined: 06/03/2011

MGoPoints: 2532

East German Judge

May 24th, 2016 at 10:33 AM ^

I'm not buying that we got so much less at least as compared to the other nike schools. When the details of THE ohio deal were released, I and at least one other blogger did an NPV analysis of the cashflows and they were almost the same or us getting a little bit more. These numbers are shown as such so that each school can claim to get the most.

Joined: 10/05/2014

MGoPoints: 190433

JOHNNAVARREISMYHERO

May 24th, 2016 at 10:57 AM ^

Full of people that were produced from semen that should have been flushed down the toilet - so yes.

Joined: 02/06/2015

MGoPoints: 4079

MI Expat NY

May 24th, 2016 at 10:52 AM ^

Honestly, who cares?  I don't know a singld person that chooses a college team to play or root for that cares how much the school's "brand" is valued at.  It's a dumb, useless metric.  

Obviously "brand value" can affect some things that do matter, like the amount of money that can be paid to coaches.  But I don't think we're ever going to be hurting in those areas where it counts.

Joined: 07/24/2008

MGoPoints: 8641

Maizen

May 24th, 2016 at 10:45 AM ^

Michigan's Nike deal is actually worth 13 million more in cash than OSU's. OSU's deal is inflated because they are getting a 2 dollar shirt and Nike is saying it has a 30 dollar value.

These numbers look great on paper but most aren't nearly what they claim. A lot like big NFL contracts.

Joined: 08/15/2015

MGoPoints: -99993347

bacon

May 24th, 2016 at 10:52 AM ^

At the end of the day, the cash is the only thing people care about. Plus, an OSU Nike shirt is inherently worth less than a Michigan Nike shirt.  Especially since one has a picture of a Jumpman on it.

Joined: 01/04/2009

MGoPoints: 18646

Rabbit21

May 24th, 2016 at 10:29 AM ^

The funniest part is the batshit(read the rest of site as to why my operating assumption that every writer for that site is batshit) Bruins Nation writer somehow thinking that signing a deal with a new apparel company will somehow solve issues with the uniform such as the length of the UCLA stripe and maintaining a consistent shade of blue that are primarily due to factors beyond the apparel companies control or even level of give-a-damn.

Interesting that UA is making such a concerted play for college sports, hopefully this makes them raise their footwear game which as far as I can tell is the most commonly cited issue with the company.  

Joined: 11/12/2009

MGoPoints: 30303

Perkis-Size Me

May 24th, 2016 at 10:38 AM ^

Just don't seem like a "cool" brand anymore.

Maybe it's a little different for Adidas across the pond, but in America it seems like it's Under Armour, Nike, and then everyone else.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/30/2011

MGoPoints: 105380

The Mad Hatter

May 24th, 2016 at 10:49 AM ^

I don't think Nike paid us enough.  Yes, Adidas sucked and we were right to change companies, but I'm not a fan of leaving a bunch of cash on the table.

The Nike deal should have been structured in a way that made sure we were the highest paid Nike school for the entire contract, like our Adidas deal was.  UA probably would have offered that.

Joined: 02/17/2015

MGoPoints: 112109

The Mad Hatter

May 24th, 2016 at 12:15 PM ^

Will help us with BB recruiting, but I'm not sure how much it will help with FB.

I honestly don't care either way, just as long as they don't fuck around with the shade of maize we're using right now.

/also, not a Michael Jordan fan in general.

Joined: 02/17/2015

MGoPoints: 112109