Started By
Message
re: Why Doesn't the Conference Negotiate Apparel deals for all members?
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:18 pm to therick711
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:18 pm to therick711
Because UA, LSU, UGA, AU, UF, etc. don't want to have their revenue dragged down by Vandy, MSU, OM etc. the current system works. Schools should get to make the decision for themselves. Not everything has to be done as a collective. It's not like TV where a shared contract increases exposure and is good for everyone.
1
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:19 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
because different schools generate far more revenue for apparel and dont rely on the other schools to help them like with TV revenue
This post was edited on 7/17/14 at 12:20 pm
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:21 pm to therick711
quote:
Tell that to the checks the conference distributed this week, and the SEC network deal, the most recent CBS television deal, and the scheduling compromises . . .
The real answer to your question is that the conference doesn't own the rights to dictate what each school buys. In the same way that they can't legally force a university to give their players Gatorade over Powerade, they can't force individual schools to all wear Nike. And really the apparel companies are basically just paying the universities to "buy" their product.
The Universities have controlling power over the conference, not the other way around. The universities gave the conference the authority to pool their tv rights together because they can get better tv deals by doing that. Even the "more popular" schools like Bama and UF can get better deals by doing it that way because the more content, the better the tv product. The individual schools like Bama and UF can not get better apparel deals by pooling together with the smaller schools like Vandy and OM. So they would never agree to give the conference the authority to dictate that.
It is simple capitalism. Hence my comment that this isn't red China.
This post was edited on 7/17/14 at 12:29 pm
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:26 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
ecause UA, LSU, UGA, AU, UF, etc. don't want to have their revenue dragged down by Vandy, MSU, OM etc.
UGA deal with Nike - 1.77 Million a year
State's deal with Adidas - 2.43 Million a year.
We hate that we are dragging you down.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:29 pm to therick711
I just briefly perused A&M's Adidas contract. I'm not an attorney ... but the terms are about much more than just apparel (i.e., all game day/special events photographs, coaching endorsements, public address announcements, radio broadcasts, camera-ready advertisements, etc.).
Scatter-shooting a few random observations:
- The contract is drawn-up per the Texas Constitution and the Laws in the State of Texas
- All sports must be included (e.g., equestrian, soccer, football, diving)
- TAMU and Adidas [not the athletic conference] mutually decide upon all designs
- in the event of NCAA probation, the contract can be terminated
Again, seems like many of these issues would be tough to handle across multiple schools. Universities--unlike the NFL--have to answer to Boards of Regents, taxpayers, alumni, etc.
Just one opinion. An interesting topic.
Scatter-shooting a few random observations:
- The contract is drawn-up per the Texas Constitution and the Laws in the State of Texas
- All sports must be included (e.g., equestrian, soccer, football, diving)
- TAMU and Adidas [not the athletic conference] mutually decide upon all designs
- in the event of NCAA probation, the contract can be terminated
Again, seems like many of these issues would be tough to handle across multiple schools. Universities--unlike the NFL--have to answer to Boards of Regents, taxpayers, alumni, etc.
Just one opinion. An interesting topic.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:36 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
Yes, but with the SEC network, you are televising games and such. Its not just one team in a game.
Exactly! Even the B1G has each school cut different apparel and promotional deals.
To me the much bigger question is why doesn't the SEC share ticket office revenue like the B1G?
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:38 pm to therick711
quote:No thanks. I don't anyone at UA giving up the rights to decide what uniforms I see Bama athletes wear.
It would be the conference office and each member institution would have to agree to give up individual rights for the collective, think like the SEC Network.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:40 pm to parkjas2001
quote:
I dont think NIKE would want to do this.
They stand to make more money picking thier clients like UGA and Bama and not being forced to make Vandy jerseys.
Uhhh, last I checked Vandy wears Nike unis.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 12:43 pm to msu202020
quote:
UGA deal with Nike - 1.77 Million a year
State's deal with Adidas - 2.43 Million a year.
We hate that we are dragging you down.
I know our numbers are correct but please let that be UGA's real figure.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 1:19 pm to EKG
quote:
Again, seems like many of these issues would be tough to handle across multiple schools. Universities--unlike the NFL--have to answer to Boards of Regents, taxpayers, alumni, etc.
Not really. You can draw up one master contract, or you can have the conference reach a number and let each member institution finalize an agreement with that vendor for the finer details if you didn't want to have just one master agreement for some reason.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 1:21 pm to therick711
Because nobody wants Under Armour besides Auburn and USCe.
Also, this is America.
Also, this is America.
This post was edited on 7/17/14 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 7/17/14 at 1:29 pm to BamaDoc14
quote:
Because nobody wants Under Armour besides Auburn and USCe.
quote:
Also, this is America.
For some of us much more than others.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 1:32 pm to DynastyDawg
quote:
I know our numbers are correct but please let that be UGA's real figure.
It probably is. UGA negotiated it in 1999 with extension options for Nike. It looks like UGA will get to renegotiate in 2017, but it's probably been a pretty bad deal for awhile.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 1:36 pm to therick711
I don't know what's funny.
Nike does $70 Billion a year.
Under Armour does $4 Billion a year.
Nike does $70 Billion a year.
Under Armour does $4 Billion a year.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 1:58 pm to BamaDoc14
Compare years of existence champ
Posted on 7/17/14 at 1:59 pm to therick711
quote:
therick711
You're one of those big government liberal progressive types. .. amirite?
Posted on 7/17/14 at 2:05 pm to scrooster
quote:
You're one of those big government liberal progressive types. .. amirite?
Trying to figure out how institutions can make even more money. Sounds an awful lot like a capitalistic enterprise, doesn't it?
Don't be a fricking idiot.Posted on 7/17/14 at 2:08 pm to BamaDoc14
quote:
Nike does $70 Billion a year.
Under Armour does $4 Billion a year.
Nike is a good deal for Bama
UA is a good deal for Auburn
Posted on 7/17/14 at 2:26 pm to DynastyDawg
quote:
UGA deal with Nike - 1.77 Million a year
State's deal with Adidas - 2.43 Million a year.
We hate that we are dragging you down.
quote:
I know our numbers are correct but please let that be UGA's real figure.
Mark Richt has lost control of Apparel deals.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 2:34 pm to msu202020
quote:
UGA deal with Nike - 1.77 Million a year
State's deal with Adidas - 2.43 Million a year.
We hate that we are dragging you down.
You also just renegotiated, prior to April it was 600k a year. and that only included gear and equipment, no money
And UGA is 2.54
This post was edited on 7/17/14 at 2:36 pm
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News