Couple things on Adidas deal

[DTP]

Twenty years ago, Miami was Nike's flagship. As the years passed, Miami got put on the back burner in terms of payments, design and hype. The Nike gear just got crappier as the years went on.

Adidas picks up the apparel contract and immediately throws a boatload of money at Miami. The first batch of jerseys was pretty bad but they've actually made improvements to Miami's gear as opposed to just trotting out horrible color combinations to try to squeeze a couple extra dollars from fans.

One company gives a crap about Miami while the other clearly had pushed Miami to the bottom of their list.

 

[edge3241]

Adidas's stock has more than doubled since their partnership with the Canes. Just saying....

 

[Pearson704]

From this ugly ****

View attachment 48425



To this

View attachment 48426


I'd say one company doesn't understand the brand but you have the wrong company

Read the thread, chiefy. These unis were done at Richt's behest, which included moving the logo from on top of the school and city name.





And, how about from this


View attachment 48437View attachment 48439View attachment 48440View attachment 48441View attachment 48443




To this ugly ****


View attachment 48438


View attachment 48433View attachment 48434View attachment 48435View attachment 48436View attachment 48442

The 1st year sucked no doubt but Adidas is a company who apparently cares about the brand because the next year they fixed everything. They are awesome and best we have had in 15+ years. Nike was giving us ugly **** for over a decade

I'm not sure why you are highlighting those Nike uniforms. Those were dog**** for the most part.

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

 

[Hurracanes]

Read the thread, chiefy. These unis were done at Richt's behest, which included moving the logo from on top of the school and city name.





And, how about from this


View attachment 48437View attachment 48439View attachment 48440View attachment 48441View attachment 48443




To this ugly ****


View attachment 48438


View attachment 48433View attachment 48434View attachment 48435View attachment 48436View attachment 48442

The 1st year sucked no doubt but Adidas is a company who apparently cares about the brand because the next year they fixed everything. They are awesome and best we have had in 15+ years. Nike was giving us ugly **** for over a decade

I'm not sure why you are highlighting those Nike uniforms. Those were dog**** for the most part.

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

Here is your L. Fast Forward to 8:15. Ironic, Nike went back to the drawing board every 3-4 years but that's ok because it was Nike....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaPU-3259kg

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Read the thread, chiefy. These unis were done at Richt's behest, which included moving the logo from on top of the school and city name.





And, how about from this


View attachment 48437View attachment 48439View attachment 48440View attachment 48441View attachment 48443




To this ugly ****


View attachment 48438


View attachment 48433View attachment 48434View attachment 48435View attachment 48436View attachment 48442

The 1st year sucked no doubt but Adidas is a company who apparently cares about the brand because the next year they fixed everything. They are awesome and best we have had in 15+ years. Nike was giving us ugly **** for over a decade

I'm not sure why you are highlighting those Nike uniforms. Those were dog**** for the most part.

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

Stop being an absolute douchebag.

adidas changed the font on the player names AFTER ONE GAME. Yeah, it was too late to change the whole jersey, but stop being a cvnt and admit that Nike kept tacky jersey designs FOR YEARS.

And the colors. My god, man, the colors. Nike NEVER could get that ****e right. What's up with that? Color-blindness?

 

[Pearson704]

The 1st year sucked no doubt but Adidas is a company who apparently cares about the brand because the next year they fixed everything. They are awesome and best we have had in 15+ years. Nike was giving us ugly **** for over a decade

I'm not sure why you are highlighting those Nike uniforms. Those were dog**** for the most part.

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

Here is your L. Fast Forward to 8:15. Ironic, Nike went back to the drawing board every 3-4 years but that's ok because it was Nike....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaPU-3259kg

a lot of smiling there, but fair enough.

 

[ChosenOne]

Adidas = More money so I'm okay with it. They couldn't have came at a better time now that Shalalalala isn't here to spend it on her hospital program and we can recreate the swagger we lost after Nike got complacent.

 

[Hurracanes]

Richt made them fix the unis and that's my point. You all should give them credit for responsiveness, yes, but Adidas need(ed) a lot of interdiction when Nike had better creative intuition going with an off-retro look.

This is to say nothing about my support for one over the other because I don't come to the defense of brands like that unless I own stock. It's not that serious for me and I think the new unis look great, FWIW.

What's happening here are the easily-triggered feeble-minded stans of on the site are looking for anything to be buthurt and b**ch about, because that's just what they do.

I'm highlighting the unis you call dog**** (1) in reply, and (2)for the sake of showing the Adidas work was worse than dog****, because there's not a fan on this site (including you) who would choose Adidas year 1 gear over the last Nike unis.

CMR had nothing to do with the uniform change. Last year, he confirmed the uniform change was already decided previously. He also said he was a big fan of the uniforms. Try again.... better yet, take this L and move on.

Not how I remembered it. I'm sure a change in the unis were planned because they had no choice but to go back to the drawing board after that epic fail. It's my understanding that Richt gave direction about the retro look he wanted for the unis and of course I'm sure he approved it, but post a link to verify what you say i'll take the L on it. Coming out the gates with that tacky look showed poor judgment, regardless.

Here is your L. Fast Forward to 8:15. Ironic, Nike went back to the drawing board every 3-4 years but that's ok because it was Nike....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaPU-3259kg

a lot of smiling there, but fair enough.

.....................

 

[edcanes]

 

[PIPO]

Paging @TheOriginalCane

 

[MiamisMoperiestMopes]

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Paging @TheOriginalCane

Rarely have I ever seen such a stupid tweet.

 

[305_separatist]

You must not see many tweets

 

[passitback]

The real important question is when are we getting 5950s with the U on it?

Why does Miami have the whack **** when other teams have decent fitteds.

 

[F-MarioCristobal]

Canegang305mia definitely has the contract in hand. My go to guy when it comes to UM contractual agreement questions

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Here are a few interesting tidbits on the new deal...

**I'm told that Adidas has plans to make Miami the "Oregon" of their company. They will try a lot of new things with us, have a bunch of uniform combos stacked up for big games, and really try to push Miami into the forefront of their marketing campaign.

**People in the know hinted at the fact that Nike had become complacent with Miami. They weren't sending as much stuff as they had in the past and as a result, players would have to wear game-used materials. Schools like Florida State, Alabama, Clemson, etc. would get new shipments almost weekly. This did not sit well with Miami. (of course, money also plays a factor in this)

**As far as the designs go, I've heard Adidas will try to model the base uniforms after the 1980's. Mostly one color (orange, white, green) with the stripe around the sleeves.

**I have also heard of a black cleat concept with the eye of a hurricane popping out on the side of the shoe, which would look very cool.

Ultimately I still disagree with the switch, but it's one of those things that we would care less about if the state of the program was different. I also don't think it will "hurt" recruiting like some have suspected it will. Kids like new things, and Adidas will certainly be pushing to make Miami look different.

Let's go back to the original @Peter Ariz post.

**How did that "make Miami the 'Oregon' of their company" **** turn out? There have NOT been "a bunch of uniform combos stacked up for big games". And Miami has NOT been "pushed into the forefront of their marketing campaign". This is important, because Peter's post was TEN YEARS AGO, and not only has this **** NOT happened, but it is further evidence of how adidas promises the sun and the moon and the stars and then delivers next to nothing.

**Then you have the old "people in the know hinted at the fact that Nike had become complacent with Miami". So, really (and I don't blame Peter), this was propaganda spread by Beta Blake. As we all know by now, Beta Blake was taking our equipment/player-edition-apparel allowances and converting them into straight cash payments, while schools like FSU, Alabama, and Clemson WERE NOT DOING THAT. So, you know...I don't know why "this did not sit well with Miami". Beta Blake engineered this "crisis" to create a chance for himself to make his "legacy move" by switching UM to adidas.

**Hey, how did the whole "model the base uniforms after the 1980s" thing go? Remember the HORRIBLE uniforms of 2015? The absolute worst uniform Miami has worn in at least 60 years? Come on, now.

**How did that "black cleat concept with the eye of a hurricane popping out on the side of the shoe" thing turn out? Not only did we NEVER do that, we don't even seem to have made it to the prototype phase. I have never ever ever seen anything like this. Ever.

This has nothing to do with being a "Nike fan boy". I acknowledge that I prefer Nike. BUT I ALSO USED TO LIKE ADIDAS. When Dale Earnhardt Jr. signed a deal with adidas, I bought a bunch of merch as soon as it was released, as "the 3 stripes" plays well in a "racing stripes" environment. And nearly all of my soccer merch is adidas stuff. I have no problems wearing quality adidas apparel and shoes.

EXCEPT...

All of these 10.5-year-old @Peter Ariz promises NEVER HAPPENED. And the merchandise (and shoes) is declining in quality year-over-year.

What I see in Peter's 10.5 year old post is a bunch of bull**** from adidas. Which is the exact same thing that we will get today from extending this bull**** contract.

I spoke to someone about this issue this weekend. His non-response filled me with dread.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

The real important question is when are we getting 5950s with the U on it?

Why does Miami have the whack **** when other teams have decent fitteds.

Never.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Canegang305mia definitely has the contract in hand. My go to guy when it comes to UM contractual agreement questions

While I pray that this post is sarcasm, I am truly concerned that certain of our contractual agreements are ABSOLUTELY in the wrong hands right now.

 

[Dwinstitles]

Premiere brand?

They treat us like second class citizens

 

[Rellyrell]

Lmao

Noooooo, that’s not the clause. The clause was for us to be the highest paid in the ACC, b/c we were told we would be their flagship program for the ACC. That was soon debunked w/ Adidas pre-extending UL, making them the highest paid school in the ACC shortly after our contract was signed.

This is y another, outside party had to inform Blake James that Adidas was in violation of our clause, & Adidas was like “well, u see, what had happened was….” Our contract’s value was around $8m/per (rounding up & being very generous b/c it’s closer to the $7.5 range), while UL was valued at $16m/per.

So no, this is not good news for Miami in regards to Adidas. UW, KU, UL, A&M, Nebraska, & now UTenn (& potentially PSU) will all be substantially more compensated. Adidas has found their new toys.

1. UL, KU are priorities b/c of UL has an alum working in an executive position, while KU is Adidas’ b-ball crown jewel. Both r long standing partners for 20+ yrs

2. UW was supposed to be Adidas’ new toy b/c this was the first time an outsider from the Pacific Northwest was able to break up the Nike monopoly in that region, plus Adidas just moved their U.S HQ to that region. UW was a marking its territory move.

3. Nebraska & Indiana r priorities b/c not only are these **** near life long apparel partners, but they move weight in merchandise

4. Now PSU & UTenn r Adidas’ new crown jewel in CFB, giving them the best odds (in their mind), to break up the Nike school’s stranglehold of winning CFB Nat’l Titles.

I literally just had this discussion w/ a former employee from Adidas’ marketing team. Do I think we stay w Adidas? My gut tells me yes just b/c I don’t trust our admin, but we will not remotely be paid anywhere near these other schools b/c:

1. We don’t have the pedigree over the past 20+ yrs as UTenn & PSU
2. We don’t move units like these other schools

Also & lastly, let’s just say hypothetically this user was correct; ummm, the terms of that 2015 contract is null & void upon renewal. lol. The promise to be the highest paid Adidas’ School would be between 2015-2027. Lmao

So either way this fan base tries to rationalize us staying, if we were promised to be the highest paid when we signed w Adidas, well that didn’t/hasn’t happened (see UL, UW, Texas A&M, Nebraska, UTenn, potentially PSU, & KU who will all be paid more than us between this time frame); but, if we were promised to be the highest paid ACC team, that didn’t/hasn’t happened (see UL).

Again, Adidas is the home of promising u the world & the moment someone/another program catch their attention, u become an after thought.