Started By
Message

Under Armour

Posted on 6/28/20 at 10:40 am
Posted by beaver
The 755 Club
Member since Sep 2009
46861 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 10:40 am
They’ve pulled out of their deal with UCLA and now all Cal gear has been removed from their website.

Chances they end their deal with Auburn? I would presume we are their largest program
Posted by The Nino
Member since Jan 2010
21520 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 10:42 am to
Isn’t Norte Dame with UA? They’re probably their largest account right now

What happened to the UCLA deal?
Posted by TheJones
Member since Nov 2009
33296 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 10:46 am to
UCLA’s deal was nearly 300 million. For comparison, Auburn’s was less than 80. Notre Dame’s was around 90.

Auburn’s deal also included $10 million in shares that are worth about $2million now. I really doubt they’re itching to get out
Posted by Leto II
Arrakis
Member since Dec 2018
21228 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 10:54 am to
Why was theirs so much more than ours?
Posted by TheJones
Member since Nov 2009
33296 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 12:49 pm to
I’m guessing the local Los Angeles market in comparison to Auburn and South Bend played a role in the difference
Posted by GenesChin
The Promise Land
Member since Feb 2012
37706 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 3:13 pm to
quote:

Why was theirs so much more than ours?



5extra years and UA publicly stated that wanted more presence in LA/West Coast markets + came right after Nike secured a bunch of schools for record amounts


Posted by jvilletiger25
jacksonville, fl
Member since Jan 2014
16989 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 3:27 pm to
quote:

Why was theirs so much more than ours?


Especially when Auburn put them on the map.
Posted by Rig
BHM
Member since Aug 2011
41856 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 3:47 pm to
If they’re ceasing to pursue collegiate deals, we’ll move to Adidas.
Posted by auzach91
Marietta, GA
Member since Jan 2009
40250 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 4:34 pm to
why are we so against Nike? Would much rather nike than adidas
Posted by BuckFama334
Central Alabama
Member since Aug 2018
1826 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 4:54 pm to
quote:

If they’re ceasing to pursue collegiate deals, we’ll move to Adidas.


Omg, I hope not. Adidas produces the cheapest looking, ugliest uniforms in sports.

I wouldn't mind the Jordan logo on Auburn's unis. That would be pretty cool, especially in bball.
Posted by Rig
BHM
Member since Aug 2011
41856 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 5:41 pm to
I’m not against Nike. I’m just saying what will make the most financial sense for the school. I don’t see Nike ponying up for AU
Posted by Tigerman97
Member since Jun 2014
10354 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 7:19 pm to
quote:

why are we so against Nike?


2010...who funded the journalism efforts into Cam?
Posted by Weagle25
THE Football State.
Member since Oct 2011
46175 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 7:22 pm to
Don’t think anyone has been anti-Nike

UA just pays more.
Posted by AUCE05
Member since Dec 2009
42557 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 9:03 pm to
It had to do with marketing and lack of from UCLA.
Posted by Ccslimm
DC
Member since Nov 2016
569 posts
Posted on 6/28/20 at 9:35 pm to
If we do move, let’s go Jordan brand for BB.

Who wouldn’t love free Jordan’s
Posted by jangalang
Member since Dec 2014
36247 posts
Posted on 6/29/20 at 5:05 am to
quote:

let’s go Jordan brand for BB

We would get all the croots
Posted by GenesChin
The Promise Land
Member since Feb 2012
37706 posts
Posted on 6/29/20 at 8:03 am to
quote:

why are we so against Nike? Would much rather nike than adidas


Nike already has deals with Bama/UGA who operate in our markets. We don't offer Nike much value, the deal would reflect that

I'm happy with UA at this point.

This post was edited on 6/29/20 at 8:04 am
Posted by AA7
Birmingham, AL
Member since Nov 2009
26681 posts
Posted on 6/29/20 at 8:09 am to
quote:

I'm happy with UA at this point.

As am I. If we were to move on I would be happy with Adidas or Jordan though. Like you said, we don’t add enough for Nike so even if we signed with them it would likely be a really poor contract for us.
Posted by PJinAtl
Atlanta
Member since Nov 2007
12740 posts
Posted on 6/29/20 at 8:25 am to
quote:

why are we so against Nike?
Weren't there issues back in the early 2000s when football was wearing Nike cleats?

I seem to remember that Nike specified how the trainers could/couldn't do spat tape jobs because the Swoosh logo had to be visible.
Posted by MrAUTigers
Florida
Member since Sep 2013
28280 posts
Posted on 6/29/20 at 8:55 am to
quote:

why are we so against Nike?


I am not sure of the particulars, but Nike shite on us somehow. I remember Tubs covered up the swoosh with black tape.
This post was edited on 6/29/20 at 8:56 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter