forums

Couple things on Adidas deal

View as article
TheOriginalCane said:
I have never said it was a "done deal" in terms of an actual contract. I've never said that at all. I have always stated the date when Miami could have open negotiations with other companies (January 1, 2026).

I have said that with guys like Mario and Jai, who have prior relationships with Nike, as well as Radakovich (Clemson was a Nike school), it was pretty much a done deal that anyone with a voice in decision-making would favor Nike.

I underestimated the Mas brothers and a couple of other alums, who really should NOT be guiding this process.

As for your request to be brief, kindly and respectfully **** off.
Click to expand...

Brother this may the shortest response you’ve ever written me. Thank you for explaining. I get where I misconstrued what was said.
 
Advertisement
Rellyrell said:
A couple of ppl know my sources from PMs, but let me explain what gets reported:

Understand the media, particularly team media, will get spoon fed talking points. When a school has a long relationship w an apparel company, & all of a sudden they make a change that’s going to ruffle the feathers of their core fan base, it needs to be justified. We’re in the era of sensationalism vs. journalism, especially when it comes to journalistic integrity.

Nike refused to address the rumors, but made a public statement valuing their relationship w PSU & wishing them the best. This is what I know:

1. While Nike valued PSU, PSU wanted O$U and UofM treatment from ONE CFP qualification.

2. Nike’s offer was actually more than PSU’s current contract, however, PSU wanted a lot of personal things that r reserved for Nike’s elite programs. PSU was no longer considered in that designation; they were in the tier 2 category.

3. Now this one can’t be 100% substantiated, but apparently Nike x Kraft (AD for PSU) = no bueno. Nike had a very nice working relationship w Sandy Barbour, while Kraft had been associated with Adidas for a long time from his time at Indiana, Loyola (before they switched to Nike), & most recently Boston College.

Apparently, similar to Blake James, bro wanted to create a mark on PSU. The verbiage he continued to parrot was “doing what’s in the best interest of the school” (Sounds familiar?). Again, I’m not sure if this is 100% factual, just something that was floated.

4. Adidas promised PSU to be its marquee program, including helping them w NIL opportunities. Ironically they promised UTenn the same. The rumor was initially $300m for 10 yrs, but now it’s being rumored anywhere between $100 - $300m. Here’s why I find this so interesting:

When UTenn was reported to leave Nike, the media said it was a $200m contract. Again, sensationalism w zero journalistic integrity. They had to make it bigger news than what it was to sway the minds of the resistance; the actual contract? Approx. $10m/yr in cash & product, a far cry from $20m/yr. Lol.

5. What Nike was not going to do was
-Be Bullied into something the ROI didn’t justify
-Pay them more $$ than either O$U or UofM when PSU only has 2 chips in its history, w the last one coming in 1986

So now with this report, now u have PSU fans saying out of no where the same thing we said here: Nike didn’t care about them; they only care about Oregon, Ohio St, & Michigan (ironically all of their rivals), when in actuality PSU was Nike’s testing school on a lot of products, & their merch was constantly in stock.

Lastly, pls understand this is the same school that terminated its long time partnership w Coca Cola for Pepsi b/c Pepsi paid more. So they went from being associated w #1 beverage company in the world to now the #3 beverage company, & the #1 apparel company in the world to the #4 apparel company. Fans r still miffed that they switched to Pepsi & r begging to go back to Coca Cola.

I’ve also heard from a cat that freelance covers PSU via IG that Franklin is not happy, along w other athletic coaches.
Click to expand...
Ohhhh OK, Thanks for breaking it down, homie. It makes perfect sense now. Nike looking at numbers and doin biness. Adidas outchea telling half truths, and strait up lies, while swinging for the fences, trying to lure bigger schools.
 
KANE said:
Ohhhh OK, Thanks for breaking it down, homie. It makes perfect sense now. Nike looking at numbers and doin biness. Adidas outchea telling half truths, and strait up lies, while swinging for the fences, trying to lure bigger schools.
Click to expand...

Bingo. I get why schools would take the bait, but u don’t become the #1 apparel brand in the world by devaluing ur brand. But let’s talk about us for a minute: We were, in fact, Adidas’ biggest coupe.

-Indiana has never won a CFB title, but they are arguably the Mecca of College Basketball

-Nebraska hadn’t won a Nat’l Title since 1995, but they r a traditional power w a rabid fan base.

So then 2015 came, & former Adidas President of North America wanted to start making noise. Adidas just lost ND, & Tennessee & needed another blue chip brand, so they promised us everything from being “their Oregon of Adidas, to making us the highest paid team in the ACC by being their flagship. The deal or the pitch sounded great, not just from a monetary standpoint, but a priority standpoint.

The reports came out that Adidas’ deal was “multiple times” greater in value, that Nike no longer prioritized us, etc etc. It’s the same rhetoric that UTenn & PSU’s reports used. But here’s the reality, & the question was asked of Pete in the OP: How much of what was reported actually happened? He never replied, & there’s a reason:

-We were not treated as Adidas’ Oregon
-We were not the highest paid Adidas branded school in the ACC
-The “investments” made towards us resulted in them literally turning their attention from Cam Ward to Travis Hunter
-Our players have not benefited from Adidas NIL initiatives sans one tennis player, & one track & field athlete (both women).

As my partner says who used to work on the Ye line, Adidas is the home of the broken promises; it’s why they’ll be hot for 3 yrs, then fall off for 5-7.

However, that’s neither here nor there; whatever Miami does is what Miami does. There’s been a litany of head scratching decisions made from w/in the AD long before Adidas v. Nike.
 
GrozDozer said:
Brother this may the shortest response you’ve ever written me. Thank you for explaining. I get where I misconstrued what was said.
Click to expand...


It's all good, man. I get a bit grouchy too. I definitely thought that UM would be doing what the athletic coaches and athletic alums and athletic players wanted to do. It appears that I miscalculated, and that OTHER people are driving the bus.
 
Rellyrell said:
The reports came out that Adidas’ deal was “multiple times” greater in value, that Nike no longer prioritized us, etc etc. It’s the same rhetoric that UTenn & PSU’s reports used. But here’s the reality, & the question was asked of Pete in the OP: How much of what was reported actually happened? He never replied, & there’s a reason:

-We were not treated as Adidas’ Oregon
-We were not the highest paid Adidas branded school in the ACC
-The “investments” made towards us resulted in them literally turning their attention from Cam Ward to Travis Hunter
-Our players have not benefited from Adidas NIL initiatives sans one tennis player, & one track & field athlete (both women).
Click to expand...


I love @Peter Ariz . But I have tagged @Peter Ariz multiple times to come to this thread in order to answer a few questions.

The first question is what was actually DELIVERED that was promised in his January 2015 post.

The second question is what has adidas done to "step up" from the first 10 years of their poor performance under the contract.

The final question is what is adidas promising to do NOW to prove that an extension will not be more of the same broken promises as before.

If @Peter Ariz can provide illumination on any of these three questions, I would truly appreciate it.
 
KANE said:
Ohhhh OK, Thanks for breaking it down, homie. It makes perfect sense now. Nike looking at numbers and doin biness. Adidas outchea telling half truths, and strait up lies, while swinging for the fences, trying to lure bigger schools.
Click to expand...
Are we pretending that the legal system and contracts don't exist? Adidas knows(and if they don't, that means their legions of attorneys are all about to get disbarred), that making promises and failing to deliver can and will get them sued to oblivion. Never mind the fact that if they are taking their collegiate sponsorship arm seriously, not delivering can and will sink them long term. It doesn't make any sense from a business or legal perspective. It would completely destroy any chance Adidas has of signing ANYONE. There's a reason why Under Armour is struggling, and it's because everyone has seen that brand back out of deals due to them being undercapitalized and on the verge of collapse.

What's more plausible: Nike, a company that has consistently undervalued properties for decades, mostly due to a lack of consistent competition is starting to experience issues due to a company finally daring to challenge them? Or, Adidas, a multinational corporation with over a century of experience and a sparkling reputation with some of the most well known sports properties on the planet is running an Enron level scam? It doesn't take a genius to understand that in a collegiate athletics landscape where revenue matters more than ever before, that Nike's "Deals" aren't cutting it. Nike was able to build a huge stable of schools mostly because Adidas and other apparel manufacturers waited too long. After that, those other manufacturers took their time, failing to consistently challenge Nike allowing the swoosh to have the power of incumbency for decades on end.
 
Last edited:
IMG_1417.jpeg
 
Canedude08 said:
Are we pretending that the legal system and contracts don't exist? Adidas knows(and if they don't, that means their legions of attorneys are all about to get disbarred), that making promises and failing to deliver can and will get them sued into oblivion. Never mind the fact that if they are taking their collegiate sponsorship arm seriously, not delivering can and will sink them long term. It doesn't make any sense from a business or legal perspective. It would completely destroy any chance Adidas has of signing ANYONE. There's a reason why Under Armour is struggling, and it's because everyone has seen that brand back out of deals due to them being undercapitalized and on the verge of collapse.

What's more plausible: Nike, a company that has consistently undervalued properties for decades, mostly due to a lack of consistent competition is starting to experience issues due to a company finally daring to challenge them? Or, Adidas, a multinational corporation with over a century of experience and a sparkling reputation with some of the most well known sports properties on the planet is running an Enron level scam? It doesn't take a genius to understand that in a collegiate athletics landscape where revenue matters more than ever before, that Nike's "Deals" aren't cutting it. Nike was able to build a huge stable of schools mostly because Adidas and other apparel manufacturers waited too long. After that, those other manufacturers took their time, failing to consistently challenge Nike allowing the swoosh to have the power of incumbency for decades on end.
Click to expand...

I need u to start addressing me vs. ignoring my continued direct responses to u on this matter.

So let’s talk about ur point of contention; have u ever read an apparel contract? If not, why do u continue to make assumptive statements? My other ? is y do u continue to defend the same company that literally had a clause in our contract to be the highest paid ACC school, & didn’t fulfill it w/in 2 yrs? It was posted on this site during a scathing investigative report on the turmoil behind the Hecht under Blake James’ leadership.

My next ? is y do u continue to defend the same company that promoted Ward’s He1sman’s campaign, only to then flex its attention to Travis Hunter who is now an Adidas athlete?

Do u even know the history of Adidas? Do u know their foundation including y they specifically chose Jesse Owens to wear their spikes in front of Adolf Hitler for marketing purpose? Do u know what that regime thought about Black athletes & how Jesse was used to promote their brand to the German National team since they were once denied?

Historical purposes aside, every apparel contract has terms & conditions-

Example 1:
Why is Manchester United now being penalized $10m (ε) / yr from an Adidas futbol contract where its value was supposed to be close to $1b? Allow me to answer, b/c there was terms & condition language that reduced payment if ManU didn’t win or qualify for certain FIFA leagues. Do u think they (ManU) were aware of this or do u think they were enamored by the big, beautiful #’s?

Example 2:
Why was UA able to abruptly cancel UCLA & Cal’s contracts facing little financial harm while simultaneously creating financial harm to both institutions during litigations? B/c of terms & conditions loop holes. I’ve begged u, pleaded w u to stop posing ur personal opinions on THIS matter. U r, & have been out of depth on THIS matter.

When ur reserves are 4x less than ur competitor, & u have to make bold moves, that can come w big consequences/risk, u absolutely bury escape clauses in ur terms & conditions.

Do u know y Ye attempted to sue Adidas after they dropped him in 2022? B/c they were still selling his designs for profit. The problem? Ye was unaware Adidas claimed IP (intellectual property) on his designs, meaning they could sell any of his products for profit w/o his consent. Well, that’s totally different than them agreeing w him (after his Nike rant) that all of his designs would be 100% his.

Wouldn’t u know he didn’t read the fine print of the terms & conditions that stated if they (Adidas) terminated their relationship for any reason, all properties belonged to them? So he went on a rant accusing them of profiting off his intellect by hiring his former employees w/o his consent, when in actuality he was unaware of Adidas’ IP clause, which is y their shareholders were concerned.

I’ve been in risk mgmt for over half of my life, & been acquainted w the apparel industry, directly, for 12 yrs. Legal teams r there to exploit any potential loop holes to protect the company, so these agreements are with a smile on their face, w two fingers behind their back making a cross, that includes Nike, as well. It’s just that Adidas has been habitually caught w over promising & under delivering.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
@gogeta4

Remember I was telling u ain’t nobody f’ing w Adidas X Fear of God?


Also recall when I told this board, repeatedly, that Adidas is the home of broken promises?

Adidas threw the kitchen sink at Jerry Lorenzo to poach him from Nike, including promising him he’ll be head over their basketball division. Well…yeah. Now, after this yr he’ll no longer be working w them, after hyping this to be the biggest collaborator coup since Ye.

So he’s going to drop his next two collabs (one w DRose & his Adidas x FOG 11.5) before the final FOG III to close out this yr. It has not been an advantageous partnership for either. Every FOG x Nike sold out immediately; u can still find FOG I & FOG II for retail.

Not sure if it’s creative differences or release issues, but that partnership went from hype to flat. It’s the same w Sean Wotherspoon; his Adidas collabs have been far in between, not generating the buzz that he did w his Nike Air Max collab, so he’s been put on the back burner for Bad Bunny & Pharrell.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Rellyrell said:
@gogeta4

Remember I was telling u ain’t nobody f’ing w Adidas X Fear of God?


Also recall when I told this board, repeatedly, that Adidas is the home of broken promises?

Adidas through the kitchen sink at Jerry Lorenzo to poach him from Nike, including promising him he’ll be head over their basketball division. Well…yeah. Now, after this yr he’ll no longer be working w them, after hyping this to be the biggest collaborator coup since Ye.

So he’s going to drop his next two collabs (one w DRose & his Adidas x FOG 11.5) before the final FOG III to close out this yr. It has not been an advantageous partnership for either. Every FOG x Nike sold out immediately; u can still find FOG I & FOG II for retail.

Not sure if it’s creative differences or release issues, but that partnership went from hype to flat. It’s the same w Sean Wotherspoon; his Adidas collabs have been far in between, not generating the buzz that he did w his Nike Air Max collab, so he’s been put on the back burner for Bad Bunny & Pharrell.
Click to expand...

Seems like you are coming around to this Adidas idea...
 
Back
Top