Nah, not equal, influence.
More money - especially now with NIL - raises the floor and ceiling on the field.
The apparel deal needs to be about bags. The more money they have to pay us (Nike, Adidas, whomever), the more they are invested in our success and the more resources we have to put into our program and players.
Has that more $$ = influence for us?
Has that more $$ = influence for UW?
Has that more $$ = influence for UL?
Has that more $$ = influence for Nebraska?
Did that more $$ = influence for UCLA w UA?
Has that more $$ = influence for ND w UA?
These have been some of the highest apparel deals, & how have this more $$ helped? Could it possibly be that some universities can give two ***** about winning as long as they cash checks, just like some fans?
There’s a poll going around social media right now: what career would u rather have: Horry, who won 7 rings & made $53m or Harden w 0 rings but made $400m? The vast majority chose Harden, u know why? They said **** winning, I’m winning off the court w $400m. Lol. This is the society we’re in: if it’s more $$ = good!
Part of the reason Nike does business the way they do vs. Adidas is b/c they want elite. It’s not about just paying $$$, it’s about making sure who they align with wants greatness, too. This is y Nike’s value dwarfs Adidas, Puma, Skechers, Hoka, NB, UA, & On Cloud…combined.
I agree $$ plays a factor in decision making, but check this out, Holmes: Out of the top 30 valued CFB programs (& I’m going to future date this for upcoming apparel changes):
70% are Nike Schools
20% are Adidas Schools (including PSU & UTenn)
10% are UA Schools
How can UGA, Bama, FSU, UF, Arkansas, Iowa, LSU have a tremendously higher evaluation than us if we’re making “more $$” w our apparel sponsor?