forums

Nike deal

Advertisement
Ricaneswag said:
facts I rocked filas in like 3rd grade lol
Click to expand...


Much respect.

Some people think this is "fanboy" stuff. Nonsense.

I got a summer job when I was in 6th grade (worked for a family friend's business) and saved up enough money to buy school clothes and shoes that my parents couldn't afford. Got the canvas Nike's with the blue stripe, and I thought it was the greatest thing I ever purchased.

Loved those shoes. Lifelong obsession.

s-l1600.jpg
 
pacusmc said:
I’m not questioning adidas’ quality of soccer cleats or quality of gear. I’m questioning they’re approach and commitment to endorsing athletes compared to Nike.

Maybe you can break down the revenue share of soccer cleats by region.

But Nike was never a major player in soccer before the 94 World Cup. They did have Aston Villa signed in the 80’s I believe and also made shoes for Ian Rush. Did they make soccer cleats? Yes. But they did not sell anywhere near what diadora, lotto, or puma did and adidas dominated the market.

Nike used the 94 World Cup as a launch point and hasn’t looked back since.

Nike learned a lot by signing MJ and used that model to continue to take over market share in every sport they touched.

And that’s my only argument. They’re just not as aggressive as adidas and lose battles for players all the time.

Nobody talks about how Nike actually lost Messi cause they ****ed off his dad allegedly.
But Barcelona has been a Nike team forever and Messi actually wore Nike until adidas pulled him away. He actually pulled a Rashada and left Nike hanging by not showing up to a photo shoot.
Could you imagine a world where Messi Neymar, Ronaldo, and all the other best players only wear Nike, and that’s what I mean by survive


So no they wouldn’t have gone bankrupt, but they were losing market share to Nike in all sports especially soccer.

In just athletic wear in general Nike sells more worldwide than both puma and adidas combined. And despite that they’re still hyper aggressive with marketing and signing players.

Kanye alone gave them an extra 2 billion in sales.
Adidas didn’t even know why their sales jumped dramatically in the early 80’s until they figured out that run dmc boosted their sales. They signed them for 1 million $.

And that’s my issue.
Adidas a worldwide quality brand just let Nike come into soccer and Europe and yanked them out their spot.

Kobe paid them to get out of his contract?!
You said that basketball players will always be attracted to Nike. But that was never the case.
Jordan literally said he would never wear Nike and basketball was not Nike’s playground. Basketball was dominated by converse who had both Bird and Magic signed.

Adidas has lost market share to Nike because of aggressive marketing and money they made by knowing that people will wear what their favorite team and player wears.

So my question again is how dedicated and focused are they to retain clients and make inroads into sports; especially college football were every **** year the playoffs are represented by at least 3 nike schools and most years it’s all four.
Click to expand...
I totally agree Nike has always been aggressive with their marketing “Just Do it” slogan. Not even sure what the slogan of Adidas is.

Man, the Bird and Jordan era with Converse was forever ago.

Chris Grancio, Adidas' global basketball general manager, said the deal hasn't been as lucrative as hoped. Adidas has been unable to make up lost ground with Nike and its Jordan brand, which account for roughly 96 percent of the basketball shoe business.

"We haven't been able to elevate our brand for the basketball consumer that we're targeting," Grancio said. "We ultimately decided that we would change our investment strategy and invest more in players on the court.

I can’t answer the question to how dedicated Adidas is compared to Nike, with college football because the latter has significantly more money and dominates the North American market.

FBS Football teams by brand:
Nike has 52%
Adidas 28%
Under Armor 13%
boardroom.tv

Breaking Down College Football's Apparel Brand Partners

From Nike to Adidas to Jordan Brand and beyond, taking stock of which sportswear companies have the strongest grip on FBS college football
boardroom.tv boardroom.tv

I can only speak on what I see and know. Nike can throw $ around like the $EC and we all know $ talks. It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re dedicated, it just means they can spend more.

Nike will always be the popular brand among our youth. I remember my first pair of Nikes when I was in the 5th grade…I was so **** proud of those shoes until I got to school and was picked on because they were not Nike “Airs” 😂

The contracts with brands and colleges are crazy long. Our 12 year contract with Adidas runs out in 2027 - est. $6,550,000/yr.

Nike contracts:
Alabama ends in 2025 - $5,250,000/yr
UGA (10yr) ends in 2024 - $3,813,000/yr.
Ohio State (15yr) ends in 2033 - $16,800,000/yr.

No school is buying out of a contract. It’s just too **** expensive and no school will get out of a Nike contract because it’s too difficult.

It’s all in the visuals though, since Nike has contracts with over 50% of college teams you’re going to keep seeing them and associate their brand with winning schools.
 
Advertisement
Cane Fan 4 Life said:
I totally agree Nike has always been aggressive with their marketing “Just Do it” slogan. Not even sure what the slogan of Adidas is.

Man, the Bird and Jordan era with Converse was forever ago.

Chris Grancio, Adidas' global basketball general manager, said the deal hasn't been as lucrative as hoped. Adidas has been unable to make up lost ground with Nike and its Jordan brand, which account for roughly 96 percent of the basketball shoe business.

"We haven't been able to elevate our brand for the basketball consumer that we're targeting," Grancio said. "We ultimately decided that we would change our investment strategy and invest more in players on the court.

I can’t answer the question to how dedicated Adidas is compared to Nike, with college football because the latter has significantly more money and dominates the North American market.

FBS Football teams by brand:
Nike has 52%
Adidas 28%
Under Armor 13%
boardroom.tv

Breaking Down College Football's Apparel Brand Partners

From Nike to Adidas to Jordan Brand and beyond, taking stock of which sportswear companies have the strongest grip on FBS college football
boardroom.tv boardroom.tv

I can only speak on what I see and know. Nike can throw $ around like the $EC and we all know $ talks. It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re dedicated, it just means they can spend more.

Nike will always be the popular brand among our youth. I remember my first pair of Nikes when I was in the 5th grade…I was so **** proud of those shoes until I got to school and was picked on because they were not Nike “Airs” 😂

The contracts with brands and colleges are crazy long. Our 12 year contract with Adidas runs out in 2027 - est. $6,550,000/yr.

Nike contracts:
Alabama ends in 2025 - $5,250,000/yr
UGA (10yr) ends in 2024 - $3,813,000/yr.
Ohio State (15yr) ends in 2033 - $16,800,000/yr.

No school is buying out of a contract. It’s just too **** expensive and no school will get out of a Nike contract because it’s too difficult.

It’s all in the visuals though, since Nike has contracts with over 50% of college teams you’re going to keep seeing them and associate their brand with winning schools.
Click to expand...

Several things:

1. This report, at the date it was posted, was inaccurate in regards to sponsorships for several schools, which means the data was off.

2. Nike doesn’t haphazardly sponsor schools; they particularly target many schools that align w/ their reputation. I did a chart showing the difference in winning %, combined, by all Nike affiliated schools vs. Adidas. The winning % is overwhelming.

To add further context to my point, throughout FBS schools, only:
-64.7% of all Nike/JB branded schools finished +.500
-52.9% of all UA branded schools finished +.500
-34.8% of all Adidas branded schools finished +.500

UA followed the same course as Nike, in which they strategically picked schools that would enhance their brand. Unfortunately, Mr Plank did a lot of shady book keeping, & poor shoe performances/designs led to UA’s downfall, & now they are slowly removing themselves out of the team apparel business.

3. The problem w/ Adidas is they have had waaaay too much turnover since Adolf, excuse me, Adi passed away. There’s been power struggles, inconsistent marketing, and having a poor eye on trends starting from the top. The other problem is they tend to always follow behind Nike, & this has been since Jordan came on the scene: From poaching Nike’s top designers/marketers, hoping they would somehow turn them around, to poaching Nike’s lead collaborators. However due to unstable leadership & a poor business model, it has always failed.

So, it’s a bit disingenuous to say Nike’s reign/success is all visual. In fact, they’ve become the absolute leader in both marketing, and sustained innovations. It’s y they r in constant legal battles w/ companies like Skechers, the aforementioned Adidas, & smaller start up companies who have blatantly ripped off designs, or in the case of Adidas, rip off designs & technology by hiring former Nike employees in hopes to drive sales.

4. B/c Nike does care about its image, they become great partners. Go look at any stadium/facility tour on YT, and when they talk about jerseys/equipment at schools like UGA, Bama, OSU, Clemson, Vandy, Tennessee, UCLA, **** even Colorado (& Deion despised Nike), they have all said the same chit; Nike make sure all their stuff is tailored specifically to each player’s needs, & they are very responsive if any equipment is not functional. (It’s actually in their contracts).

5. Lastly, Adidas botched Reebok tremendously. They lost a golden opportunity to restore nostalgia & play on A.I’s renewed popularity. They sold the company a couple yrs back.
 
Last edited:
Rellyrell said:
Several things:

1. This report, at the date it was posted, was inaccurate in regards to sponsorships for several schools, which means the data was off.

2. Nike doesn’t haphazardly sponsor schools; they particularly target many schools that align w/ their reputation. I did a chart showing the difference in winning %, combined, by all Nike affiliated schools vs. Adidas. The winning % is overwhelming.

To add further context to my point, throughout FBS schools, only:
-64.7% of all Nike/JB branded schools finished +.500
-52.9% of all UA branded schools finished +.500
-34.8% of all Adidas branded schools finished +.500

UA followed the same course as Nike, in which they strategically picked schools that would enhance their brand. Unfortunately, Mr Plank did a lot of shady book keeping, & poor shoe performances/designs led to UA’s downfall, & now they are slowly removing themselves out of the team apparel business.

3. The problem w/ Adidas is they have had waaaay too much turnover since Adolf, excuse me, Adi passed away. There’s been power struggles, inconsistent marketing, and having a poor eye on trends starting from the top. The other problem is they tend to always follow behind Nike, & this has been since Jordan came on the scene: From poaching Nike’s top designers/marketers, hoping they would somehow turn them around, to poaching Nike’s lead collaborators. However due to unstable leadership & a poor business model, it has always failed.

So, it’s a bit disingenuous to say Nike’s reign/success is all visual. In fact, they’ve become the absolute leader in both marketing, and sustained innovations. It’s y they r in constant legal battles w/ companies like Skechers, the aforementioned Adidas, & smaller start up companies who have blatantly ripped off designs, or in the case of Adidas, rip off designs & technology by hiring former Nike employees in hopes to drive sales.

4. B/c Nike does care about its image, they become great partners. Go look at any stadium/facility tour on YT, and when they talk about jerseys/equipment at schools like UGA, Bama, OSU, Clemson, Vandy, Tennessee, UCLA, **** even Colorado (& Deion despised Nike), they have all said the same chit; Nike make sure all their stuff is tailored specifically to each player’s needs, & they are very responsive if any equipment is not functional. (It’s actually in their contracts).

5. Lastly, Adidas botched Reebok tremendously. They lost a golden opportunity to restore nostalgia & play on A.I’s renewed popularity. They sold the company a couple yrs back.
Click to expand...
I agree with points made by both you and @pacusmc. @pacusmc just wanted to know when we would see a team sponsored by a brand besides Nike represented in the NCAA football play offs.

We all know Nike aligns itself with winning schools and who wouldn’t? It’s been a proven business model for success. If a team/school wins and are wearing Nike apparel, now Nike is associated with being a winner.

As far as business practices (good/bad) go between the 2 powerhouses, I admittedly don’t know much about either. I do know that over the course of time all business will experience turnover, new business plans, changing practices, etc.

Businesses “poaching” employees or employees leaving to work for a competitor happens all the time. For relevance in college sports, see the “transfer portal”.

I’m not bashing Nike or Adidas, they both have their strengths and weaknesses. Are you guys old enough to remember the alleged Nike “sweat shops”?

During my lifetime of 44 years, I believe Nike has stayed the course throughout and their business model has remained strong. Unless something drastic changes, I don’t see that changing in the near or distant future.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I understand. I don't hate the current adidas jerseys.

But we have to be honest. We have had the same jersey design from 2016 until now. That's at least seven years in a row. I'd be willing to bet that we do NOT have a new jersey design for 2023. Which means we will have had the same jersey design for 8 consecutive years. And it's a very simple design. I could see keeping our 2001 design for 8 years, but we didn't.

I think that we can do something innovative, and not just the same simplistic thing for 8 years in a row.

Again, I am not ripping on adidas for jersey design. But it's time to move on from this whole sadly unproductive relationship.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily hate the Adidas jerseys right now, but what Nike gives us is FAR SUPERIOR shirts, shorts, shoes, and everything else for us fans to wear. Bring it on!!!!!!
 
Advertisement
Cane Fan 4 Life said:
I agree with points made by both you and @pacusmc. @pacusmc just wanted to know when we would see a team sponsored by a brand besides Nike represented in the NCAA football play offs.

We all know Nike aligns itself with winning schools and who wouldn’t? It’s been a proven business model for success. If a team/school wins and are wearing Nike apparel, now Nike is associated with being a winner.

As far as business practices (good/bad) go between the 2 powerhouses, I admittedly don’t know much about either. I do know that over the course of time all business will experience turnover, new business plans, changing practices, etc.

Businesses “poaching” employees or employees leaving to work for a competitor happens all the time. For relevance in college sports, see the “transfer portal”.

I’m not bashing Nike or Adidas, they both have their strengths and weaknesses. Are you guys old enough to remember the alleged Nike “sweat shops”?

During my lifetime of 44 years, I believe Nike has stayed the course throughout and their business model has remained strong. Unless something drastic changes, I don’t see that changing in the near or distant future.
Click to expand...

Chiiiit, do I? It’s something Nike has improved upon, but they still need better oversight in. Their rating increased by a watch dog group, but it still needs to be tightened up more.

Speaking of sweat shops:

nwlaborpress.org

Sweatshop protest comes to Adidas - nwLaborPress

Led by Kalpona Akter, president of the Bangladeshi Garment and Industrial Worker Federation, about half the participants were from Machinists Lodge 1005.
nwlaborpress.org nwlaborpress.org

Adidas did & has done so too; it’s y ND broke ties w/ them. Bro, u ain’t too much older than me, only have me by a couple yrs. Lol

But, back to the main point…yes, Nike business model hasn’t changed, & won’t change. They learned quite a bit from the MJ model. Also I think, well I know, they learned from other past mistakes like how they handled Allyson Felix (& if I was an employee of theirs, I would do everything in my power to get her back as a legacy athlete), Lance Armstrong, Steph Curry, etc.

Perception is reality; and right now an Adidas branded school hasn’t won a CFB title since 1998 (Tennessee). Here’s what’s crazy, since 1990:

CFB:
Of the 37 recognized Nat’l Champions (due to splits):
83.7% were Nike branded schools
8.1% were Adidas branded schools
5.4% were other branded schools
2.7% were Under Armour Schools

When u couple that w/ the brand being associated w/ Serena, Tiger, MJ, LBJ, Kobe, Jerry Rice, Ronaldo, Steve Young, Troy Aikman, Barry Sanders, etc. then u have a very crazy perception which appeals to young ppl who want to be associated with the brand that dominates.
 
hoops156 said:
meh were not traditional. we should never be traditional. we are a program that bucked tradition and decorum. we were renegades. lets get back to being a disruptor. we will never be a bama power in terms of brand and tradition. we are miami. embrace it.
Click to expand...
What u said is true. We did buck tradition. But 4/5 of our nattys came while wearing traditional uniforms. We didn’t buck tradition by becoming Oregon East. We bucked tradition by kicking ***… and telling them that we were gonna kick their ***. Brashness, confidence, swagger …. and yes winning was what bucked tradition. Nobody had ever done it like we did it. Nor have they done it since. We don’t have to wear 47 uniform combos, to embrace being miami. We embrace being miami, by getting back to winning, and ****ing the media and the establishment off. “Hit Stick, Bust Dicc, Talk ****”!
 
KANE said:
What u said is true. We did buck tradition. But 4/5 of our nattys came while wearing traditional uniforms. We didn’t buck tradition by becoming Oregon East. We bucked tradition by kicking ***… and telling them that we were gonna kick their ***. Brashness, confidence, swagger …. and yes winning was what bucked tradition. Nobody had ever done it like we did it. Nor have they done it since. We don’t have to wear 47 uniform combos, to embrace being miami. We embrace being miami, by getting back to winning, and ****ing the media and the establishment off. “Hit Stick, Bust Dicc, Talk ****”!
Click to expand...

Say it louder!
 
Advertisement
@Rellyrell

Wouldn't Adidas and UA though have a harder time of having schools +. 500 win percentage considering they have less than half of the market combined? Nike has a built in margin of error with the amount of teams they have with a loser not hurting that percentage as much. Hope that makes sense, gotta run, but saw your post above on that.
 
Cane Fan 4 Life said:
I totally agree Nike has always been aggressive with their marketing “Just Do it” slogan. Not even sure what the slogan of Adidas is.

Man, the Bird and Jordan era with Converse was forever ago.

Chris Grancio, Adidas' global basketball general manager, said the deal hasn't been as lucrative as hoped. Adidas has been unable to make up lost ground with Nike and its Jordan brand, which account for roughly 96 percent of the basketball shoe business.

"We haven't been able to elevate our brand for the basketball consumer that we're targeting," Grancio said. "We ultimately decided that we would change our investment strategy and invest more in players on the court.

I can’t answer the question to how dedicated Adidas is compared to Nike, with college football because the latter has significantly more money and dominates the North American market.

FBS Football teams by brand:
Nike has 52%
Adidas 28%
Under Armor 13%
boardroom.tv

Breaking Down College Football's Apparel Brand Partners

From Nike to Adidas to Jordan Brand and beyond, taking stock of which sportswear companies have the strongest grip on FBS college football
boardroom.tv boardroom.tv

I can only speak on what I see and know. Nike can throw $ around like the $EC and we all know $ talks. It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re dedicated, it just means they can spend more.

Nike will always be the popular brand among our youth. I remember my first pair of Nikes when I was in the 5th grade…I was so **** proud of those shoes until I got to school and was picked on because they were not Nike “Airs” 😂

The contracts with brands and colleges are crazy long. Our 12 year contract with Adidas runs out in 2027 - est. $6,550,000/yr.

Nike contracts:
Alabama ends in 2025 - $5,250,000/yr
UGA (10yr) ends in 2024 - $3,813,000/yr.
Ohio State (15yr) ends in 2033 - $16,800,000/yr.

No school is buying out of a contract. It’s just too **** expensive and no school will get out of a Nike contract because it’s too difficult.

It’s all in the visuals though, since Nike has contracts with over 50% of college teams you’re going to keep seeing them and associate their brand with winning schools.
Click to expand...
Hopefully Adidas and UnderArmour increase not decrease. Need competition.
 
SayWhat said:
@Rellyrell

Wouldn't Adidas and UA though have a harder time of having schools +. 500 win percentage considering they have less than half of the market combined? Nike has a built in margin of error with the amount of teams they have with a loser not hurting that percentage as much. Hope that makes sense, gotta run, but saw your post above on that.
Click to expand...

UA has 52% of their teams winning +.500, yet they have waaaaay less than Adidas teams. ****, in some conferences, they don’t have any teams.

Part of the reason that % is so high is due to them not having many teams under their umbrella, so they need fewer teams to skew the #’s.

But let me give u an example of Adidas vs. UA:

Adidas had Wisconsin, let them go to UA
Adidas had ND, ND refused to do business w/ them
Adidas had Tennessee, let them go to Nike
Adidas had Kentucky, let them go to Nike
Adidas had UCLA, let them go to UA
Adidas had a chance to get Auburn, let them go to UA

What Adidas did was let some marquee programs go, & in turn, became aggressive in sponsoring teams from The Sun Belt Conference; that’s the vast majority of their programs. So no, it’s not just market share, it’s Adidas doing dumb chit in their business practice. They also had an opportunity w/ the HBCU’s, and allowed Nike/JB to dominate that market, further segregating themselves from an important market.
 
Advertisement
It sounds like they aren't getting the returns they want so they're dumping out of the market. That's if they let those programs go as you said.

I haven't read 99 percent of this thread. If it doesn't make money, why stay in it though.
 
AIR is free on Amazon video if you have Amazon Prime now. I just watched and thought it was a good movie. I was born in 80 so those Jordan / Bo Jackson / Gretzky / Mike Tyson days were bad ***.
 
KANE said:
What u said is true. We did buck tradition. But 4/5 of our nattys came while wearing traditional uniforms. We didn’t buck tradition by becoming Oregon East. We bucked tradition by kicking ***… and telling them that we were gonna kick their ***. Brashness, confidence, swagger …. and yes winning was what bucked tradition. Nobody had ever done it like we did it. Nor have they done it since. We don’t have to wear 47 uniform combos, to embrace being miami. We embrace being miami, by getting back to winning, and ****ing the media and the establishment off. “Hit Stick, Bust Dicc, Talk ****”!
Click to expand...
The whole deal with Oregon having twenty uniforms always seemed really lame and desperate to me. It’s like “Hey! We’ve never actually won anything and we get curb stomped any time we play a team with a defensive line but look at our cool highlighter uniforms!” I understand that for some kids, that’s a big selling point but tbh, if the uniform is what’s most important to you, I’m it really sure you’re the kind of football player I want on my team.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top