Uniform thread

Chan15A

Georgia Tech Fan
Messages
31
There is probably a very obvious reason, but why exactly do we stick with Russell? Why not move to another provider? It definitely would make a difference in recruiting.
 

Enuratique

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
318
There is probably a very obvious reason, but why exactly do we stick with Russell? Why not move to another provider? It definitely would make a difference in recruiting.

Don't know the real answer, but I think the rumor I've heard is that we have some GTAA connection to Russell Athletic (family, business, not sure) and when we were more cash-strapped, we signed a long term contract with them that paid us decently.
 

Bruce Wayne

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,870
Play around with the database at this link and you can see what's going on.

Florida State University ACC Nike $4,400,000
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill ACC Nike $3,550,000
North Carolina State University ACC Adidas $3,025,000
Georgia Institute of Technology ACC Russell Athletic $2,300,000
University of Virginia ACC Nike $1,575,000
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University ACC Nike $1,275,000
Clemson University ACC Nike $1,000,000


Whatever connections between Russell and Tech, or even if none, presumably the AD who signed the contract at the time found that this was the best available as far as compensation to the school. AD's are almost always going to sign the most lucrative deal . . . and not go for a less lucrative deal just because some other manufacturer is sexier.

Tech's contract seems to run through 2017 or 2018. Since no extension has been signed at this time I am going to guess that MBob is researching and working on what available deals can be negotiated and out there for him for beyond 2017/18. Unless you think Adidas or whomever would want to come in and offer to buy out a contract that Tech has with Russell, then you need to wait a couple years to see what sort of contract MBob works out to extend with Russell or go to a different supplier.

But given that Tech has a better deal (as of August 2014) than VPI and Clemson . . . COMBINED . . . then I think it is pretty clear why Tech went with Russell and is honoring their contract to them.

Maybe MBob will be testing the waters and taking competing bids with all vendors over the next couple years and if Tech has continued on-field success in football then it may just be the honey that draws the flies.
 

ClydeBrick

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
944
There is probably a very obvious reason, but why exactly do we stick with Russell? Why not move to another provider? It definitely would make a difference in recruiting.

Is the highlighted really true?

I have no idea about why Russell is the provider of the uniforms. It is my (uninformed) opinion that the tradition minded donors to the GTAA probably do not have the same sense about uniform "style" as the 17-year old recruits do. However, does our recruiting staff actually get feedback from recruits that goes like this:

I got the grades in high school.
I want a degree in something that GT offers.
I welcome the challenge the rigors of The Institute offers.
I love the option-based offensive scheme CPJ uses.
The facilities are great.
The Ratio doesn't bother me.
The uniforms suck - therefore I am going to (insert name of another school with "sexy" uniforms).

??
 

B Lifsey

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,379
Location
Barnesville, Georgia
@ClydeBrick ,
Totally a wild guess on my end, but I'd think the way uniforms could make a difference in recruiting isn't being in the final criteria but more in a sense of catching the eye of a young recruit that doesn't know much about GT, what GT offers, the faculties, etc. It would be like parking the shiny, 200mph Corvette in front of a Chevy dealer knowing most potential customers that come in door are after a Chevette not a Corvette.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,676
The uniforms suck - therefore I am going to (insert name of another school with "sexy" uniforms).
Yep, you've got a good point. We make way more out of the uniform thing than the average kid who wants to play football for Tech.

As someone posted earlier, there has been a long standing rumor that the management at Russell has a Tech connection. Even if that is not true the current payout from Russell that Tech gets trumps the "sexiness" of any other vendor at this time.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,045
We're not gonna get or want kids who's top priority is how "sick" the uni's are. We are gonna get and want the kids who value a school that offers the best combination of athletics and academics. That said, unis might help for those kids that are torn between us and say a Stanford or ND.... other schools that offer what we do.
 

ClydeBrick

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
944
@B Lifsey ,

To your analogy, I think that going to Tech means that you only want the Corvette, not the Chevette. If all you want is basic transportation there are many other car lots that will not mess with you as much as Ma Tech does during your stay on The Flats.

If The Institute had a win-at-any-cost mentality, could offer a recruit an "educational" experience that an average high school athlete could handle (for at least 3 years), had factory-like facilities and the head coach appeared to offer a NFL-style scheme AND we offered only old-school uniforms we'd be . . . Alabama. :rolleyes:

Well, probably not Alabama. But I would agree that the uniforms could actually make a difference to a recruit that thinks the NFL is his primary future employer.

There are seven items on my (non-exhaustive) list of issues with recruits above. I would have to think that the first six offer greater obstacles on the recruiting trail for GT than the uniforms that the team wears - especially with kids who only dream of the NFL.

The uniform as a difference maker with a student athlete that would consider GT? I guess anything is possible, and every edge would help. Would Nike uniforms get the program to the top? Not unless we change The Institute to a factory-style university, and GT got the same consideration from Phil Knight that Oregon does along with those Nike uniforms.

Because as @Bruce Wayne showed us above, the money will be the primary reason GT keeps or changes uniform manufacturers.
 

Lee

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
841
It's not just about uniforms. Another factor that I haven't seen mentioned is all the other gear and apparel the players get to wear around campus. Go to the gym and count how many people are wearing Russell gear (if any), then make a note of how old they are. Then look and see how many are wearing Nike or UA and take note of their age as well. While I think the uniforms would be better with a switch, I'm of the opinion that if we switched to Nike or UA and kept the uniforms the same, it would still have a positive impact on recruiting. Brand and image matter whether you want to admit it or not.

Think of it this way. If you could have a brand new BMW or a brand new Honda and you didn't have to pay for it, which would you chose? Would your answer change if performance was almost the same?

Lastly, I don't think there is a recruit out there that has uniforms as his top priority. To act like we wouldn't want a guy that cares about uniforms is either naive or elitist. Our current players have shown excitement over wearing new/different uniforms and I bet if you asked them "off the record," they would tell you they would rather have Nike or UA. So while unis are not a deal breaker for most, they are important to 17-18 year old kids.

Edit to add: Bruce you make a good point on the revenue our deal with Russell brings in and it makes sense financially. I just wanted to point out that switching from Russell to Nike or UA would be about more than just uniforms.
 

Bruce Wayne

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,870
Edit to add: Bruce you make a good point on the revenue our deal with Russell brings in and it makes sense financially. I just wanted to point out that switching from Russell to Nike or UA would be about more than just uniforms.
Yeah, I don't think I have ever really shared an opinion on uniforms. All I had to add is what I found about the money trail involved here and if there is something a bunch of engineers should be able to understand it is when someone let's the relative lucrativeness or savings of a deal carry a lot of weight. Right?

I think MBob and all Tech AD's will listen to the traditionalist fans advice on uniforms, and they will listen to all the younger fans and the student-athletes and recruits who really prefer the look and name brand bling of Nike, et. al. Then they will take that input and put it on the scale. On the other side of the scale they will then place the most lucrative deals/contracts they can get from each of the uniform manufacturers. And when the fans opinion side of the scale ends up at least equal to the money side of the scale then we will see everyone happy. Until then I guarantee you that a Tech AD is going to listen sympathetically to complaints about Russell and then forget the complaint immediately afterwards.

If Nike is giving Clemson less than half what we get from Russell . . . then we will be with Russell a long time whether us fans or the recruits like it or not.
 

dmurdock

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
231
I found a couple articles on the Russell deal. The current 10 year deal was signed in 2008 and thus runs through 2018. Russell is headquartered in Atlanta, and here is a quote from the second article: Russell Athletic Exec VP Gary Barfield said GT "is probably our premier relationship, and being in Atlanta the proximity allows us to develop things using their athletes."
http://www.ramblinwreck.com/genrel/081908aab.html
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...Signs-10-Year-Deal-With-Russell-Athletic.aspx

I also found an article from yellowjackedup that indicates we are not exclusive to Russell (Nike provides our shoes) and a theory that Under Armour might be making a push to replace Russell after 2018.
http://yellowjackedup.com/2014/08/25/armour-making-push-next-georgia-tech-apparel-deal/
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,676
I've also heard that players wear Under Armour underneath their uniforms as well as casually around the locker room and other places. Person claimed to know this as a fact but I cannot vouch for it.
 

techdad

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
104
Once again, I know that Russell can make ANY uniform that UA or Nike makes, However, it is not their decision on GT's uniforms. I do understand that Russell is not the "cool" brand to wear. A few years ago, the equipment room was stocked with flat black matte helmets that never came out of the boxes and were eventually shipped back. Seniors have an input on home uniforms as long as they are white jerseys. In other words, it is the higher ups at GT that determine what they wear on the field. Personally I would love to see alternate jerseys or even a gold chrome helmet and I know the players would too.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,676
A few years ago, the equipment room was stocked with flat black matte helmets that never came out of the boxes and were eventually shipped back.

I do not want us on the slippery slope of making black an official Tech color. I will never forgive Curry for introducing black. What some people "saw" as black in the past was really deep navy blue. But then again, some see dresses as white and gold and others see it as black and blue.
 
Top