2023 Adidas SWAG Watch

Jim Prather

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,038
But wasn't there another problem with the Nike deal last time? Something like they would only provide uniforms for football and basketball but none of the other sports?
 
boger2337

boger2337

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,435
Jim Prather said:
But wasn't there another problem with the Nike deal last time? Something like they would only provide uniforms for football and basketball but none of the other sports?
Click to expand...
None of the other sports matter except baseball lol. Everything else can go to the goodwill for all I care.
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,953
If y’all think we’re playing second fiddle with adidas, what do you expect differently out of Nike? Nike has the NFL, NBA, and MLB, dozens of top tier soccer teams, over half of all FBS schools, and over 70% of P5 schools. Georgia Tech would bring literally nothing to Nike. Think Nike would sort out our gold? Texas and Tennessee fans both complain about Nike’s inability to get their respective oranges right. Look at any Nike school that wears gold and tell me you’d be okay with the horrible khaki color they provide. Look at Purdue. You can barely even consider that “gold.”
308B9A02-4282-4539-939D-F6FFE4C549A5.jpeg


At least with adidas, we’re one of their few P5 schools. They cannot afford to lose any of what they do have. We get better treatment right now from adidas than we ever would from Nike.
 
boger2337

boger2337

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,435
I just wish we would go this route in uniform design. Don't use under armour but these are some of the nicest uniforms I've seen in a long time.

This screams white and gold.
20477261-931B-4718-B3EA-968A8CB262A9.png
 
SteamWhistle

SteamWhistle

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,435
Location
Rome, GA
I also don’t understand what the point is of “well we won’t bring money to Nike” do you guys think these D2 and JUCO colleges that are signed to Nike move the needle for them?
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,953
SteamWhistle said:
I also don’t understand what the point is of “well we won’t bring money to Nike” do you guys think these D2 and JUCO colleges that are signed to Nike move the needle for them?
Click to expand...
Nike is making little to no fan gear for those places. They pretty much just supply the uniforms. If Tennessee and Texas fans aren’t happy with how Nike treats their unique color ways, how do you think they’ll treat Tech’s? There’s virtually no upside to flipping to Nike for GT right now. We’d get less money, be even less of a priority for our manufacturer, and probably have to find another supplier for our non-revenue sports.
 
SteamWhistle

SteamWhistle

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,435
Location
Rome, GA
JacketOff said:
Nike is making little to no fan gear for those places. They pretty much just supply the uniforms. If Tennessee and Texas fans aren’t happy with how Nike treats their unique color ways, how do you think they’ll treat Tech’s? There’s virtually no upside to flipping to Nike for GT right now. We’d get less money, be even less of a priority for our manufacturer, and probably have to find another supplier for our non-revenue sports.
Click to expand...
A Huge benefit to us from Nike will be the Nike EYBL in atlanta. NIL $ opportunity for us there and also Nike was our footwear provider for years even during Russell it’s not like they are oblivious to GT. Adidas is only giving us 200,000 a year with 3 million in gear, for example UGA gets a Million from Nike a year with 2.8 million in Gear. Nike obviously wouldn’t pay us as much as UGA but I bet it would be more then 200,000
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,953
SteamWhistle said:
A Huge benefit to us from Nike will be the Nike EYBL in atlanta. NIL $ opportunity for us there and also Nike was our footwear provider for years even during Russell it’s not like they are oblivious to GT. Adidas is only giving us 200,000 a year with 3 million in gear, for example UGA gets a Million from Nike a year with 2.8 million in Gear. Nike obviously wouldn’t pay us as much as UGA but I bet it would be more then 200,000
Click to expand...
sports.yahoo.com

UCLA’s New Nike Contract Pays Less Than Half of Prior Deal With Under Armour

UCLA’s new Nike deal will pay the university less than half of what the school was owed per year under its prior agreement with Under Armour, further evidence of a wider market correction for NCAA apparel contracts. The total value of the Nike deal, not including incentives, is $46.45 million...
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com

Nike is paying less than half of what Under Armor was paying to UCLA. A massive brand name school soon to be in the B1G. Notoriety in football, men’s & women’s basketball, as well as baseball, softball, soccer, and plenty of other non-revenue sports. They’re getting $500k in cash from Nike per year.

You think we’d get that out of Nike? Our best teams on campus are baseball and golf, and Nike wanted nothing to do with them last go-around. GT is not going to get anything more out of Nike than we’re already getting out of Adidas.

www.forbes.com

The Most Valuable College Apparel Deals 2018

With a contract netting UCLA an average of $12.76 million per year, the Bruins keep the top spot on our list for the second year in a row.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Compare Washington's new deal with Clemson's recent extension with Nike, and it either sheds light on the current softness of the market or indicates a missed opportunity by the 2017 national football champions. Clemson's new contract nets it an annual average of $3.2 million, an increase of $1.72 million from its old contract with Nike. It sounds like a large jump, but just $400,000 of Clemson's extension with Nike is in cash, with the remaining value placed in product allotment. Meanwhile, $4.9 million of Washington's new deal with Adidas is in cash.
Click to expand...
Clemson re-upped with Nike in 2018, the same year we signed with Adidas. They’re only getting $400k in cash from Nike through 2028. At the time of their contract extension, they had been to 3 consecutive CFP’s, had won a national championship, and were poised to win another one that same year. You really think if Nike values Clemson at $400k per year, they’re going to value us at the same rate? If they did, every Nike school who is attached to them at the same or lesser rates than what they give us will blow up in an outrage. We’re better off with Adidas right now than we are with anybody else.
 
GT flunkout

GT flunkout

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
374
JacketOff said:
sports.yahoo.com

UCLA’s New Nike Contract Pays Less Than Half of Prior Deal With Under Armour

UCLA’s new Nike deal will pay the university less than half of what the school was owed per year under its prior agreement with Under Armour, further evidence of a wider market correction for NCAA apparel contracts. The total value of the Nike deal, not including incentives, is $46.45 million...
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com

Nike is paying less than half of what Under Armor was paying to UCLA. A massive brand name school soon to be in the B1G. Notoriety in football, men’s & women’s basketball, as well as baseball, softball, soccer, and plenty of other non-revenue sports. They’re getting $500k in cash from Nike per year.

You think we’d get that out of Nike? Our best teams on campus are baseball and golf, and Nike wanted nothing to do with them last go-around. GT is not going to get anything more out of Nike than we’re already getting out of Adidas.

www.forbes.com

The Most Valuable College Apparel Deals 2018

With a contract netting UCLA an average of $12.76 million per year, the Bruins keep the top spot on our list for the second year in a row.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

Clemson re-upped with Nike in 2018, the same year we signed with Adidas. They’re only getting $400k in cash from Nike through 2028. At the time of their contract extension, they had been to 3 consecutive CFP’s, had won a national championship, and were poised to win another one that same year. You really think if Nike values Clemson at $400k per year, they’re going to value us at the same rate? If they did, every Nike school who is attached to them at the same or lesser rates than what they give us will blow up in an outrage. We’re better off with Adidas right now than we are with anybody else.
Click to expand...

UCLA is not a "massive brand" regardless of overall athletic success or B10 expansion. They are barely an afterthought in the LA market. I do agree we wouldn't get anything more than we are getting as far as money, but Nike marketing and branding, and overall quality, makes it superior to Adidas imo. Adidas has been a disappointment.
 

JacketOff

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,953
GT flunkout said:
UCLA is not a "massive brand" regardless of overall athletic success or B10 expansion. They are barely an afterthought in the LA market. I do agree we wouldn't get anything more than we are getting as far as money, but Nike marketing and branding, and overall quality, makes it superior to Adidas imo. Adidas has been a disappointment.
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree on UCLA not being a massive brand. It’s literally one of the largest brands in all of college sports. But that’s irrelevant.

What marketing will Nike provide that we aren’t already getting? It’s not like having a Nike swoosh on our uniforms will raise any awareness of the GT brand that having Adidas doesn’t already do. Nike isn’t going to do anything to promote us. Why would they? They don’t even really do anything to promote their actual large brands. The only thing that matters is cash value, and odds are we’re going to get more cash from Adidas than we are from Nike.
 
Top