Is Adidas hooking us up with new unis this year?

[SoldierForThisU]

I saw this concept design and enjoyed it. Reminds me of the 2001 era

I like these too. Scrap the different helmets and the black jerseys tho. Pretty simple, clean. Looks good to me.

You need the black to be competitive with other schools at this point. Almost everyone does it. The holdouts appear to be mainly Bama, USC, and Golden's old team.

 

[The Franchise]

I will say this... Adidas is a HUGE reason we could hire a coach like Mark Richt. For that reason alone, you won't hear me cry about uniforms for quite some time.

Based on what evidence? Miami tried to hire Richt before we moved to Adidas. Don't mistake our last several bad choices as financial inability to hire well.

With a final two of Edsall and Golden, we weren't offering the kind of money it would have taken to get Coach Richt back in 2010-2011. The Adidas contract helps with that.

You understand that we offered Folden way more than he deserved right? Then, we gave him a raise coming off a beatdown by a 2 win BC team.

We tried to hire Richt. Richt is a loyal guy, and he wasn't leaving UGA of his own volition. He turned UM down before we could get to numbers.

Remember that we also tried to hire Richt AFTER WE SIGNED WITH ADIDAS after we fired Folden. He turned us down that time too because he was loyal to UGA. So there goes your theory on Adidas.

Before we hired Folden, UM was also talking to Jon Gruden. There's no way you're in talks with Gruden not knowing you're going to have to pay him.

Is UF cheap and uncommitted to football because it hired Muschamp for a couple mill? Or how about when it hired Zook for cheap?

Sometimes, you're constrained by the available candidates when your job comes open.

This whole Adidas pulling the strings story is fable. They're not paying all that much more than Nike was paying per year. They have no say in anything.

 

[DTP]

Miami doesn't disclose their financial figures but it's safe to say the Adidas contract pays significantly more than the Nike one. Arizona State also switched over to Adidas and their new contract pays them over 3 million a year more than their previous Nike deal. Mind you, ASU's Adidas deal is only 8 years, 33 million. Dwarfed by Miami's 12 year deal for reportedly over 90 million. Whether or not that money actually made the difference in which coaches Miami went after is only really known by the athletic department and President. However, it's a lot easier to dole out 4 mil a year to a head coach PLUS significant raises to the assistants when you've got a couple extra million a year coming in from an apparel contract.

 

[ncpalles]

all u need. helmet speaks for itself

 

[Rellyrell]

I will say this... Adidas is a HUGE reason we could hire a coach like Mark Richt. For that reason alone, you won't hear me cry about uniforms for quite some time.

Based on what evidence? Miami tried to hire Richt before we moved to Adidas. Don't mistake our last several bad choices as financial inability to hire well.

With a final two of Edsall and Golden, we weren't offering the kind of money it would have taken to get Coach Richt back in 2010-2011. The Adidas contract helps with that.

You understand that we offered Folden way more than he deserved right? Then, we gave him a raise coming off a beatdown by a 2 win BC team.

We tried to hire Richt. Richt is a loyal guy, and he wasn't leaving UGA of his own volition. He turned UM down before we could get to numbers.

Remember that we also tried to hire Richt AFTER WE SIGNED WITH ADIDAS after we fired Folden. He turned us down that time too because he was loyal to UGA. So there goes your theory on Adidas.

Before we hired Folden, UM was also talking to Jon Gruden. There's no way you're in talks with Gruden not knowing you're going to have to pay him.

Is UF cheap and uncommitted to football because it hired Muschamp for a couple mill? Or how about when it hired Zook for cheap?

Sometimes, you're constrained by the available candidates when your job comes open.

This whole Adidas pulling the strings story is fable. They're not paying all that much more than Nike was paying per year. They have no say in anything.

@ Franchise: Bro, you're making too much sense. The storylines that some of these posters put up become truth on this board. Adidas had zero influence on this hire.

 

[Rellyrell]

all u need. helmet speaks for itself

View attachment 36339

the helmet has always looked like this.....and this is how our jerseys were "supposed" to look.

 

[Rellyrell]

I saw this concept design and enjoyed it. Reminds me of the 2001 era

I like these too. Scrap the different helmets and the black jerseys tho. Pretty simple, clean. Looks good to me.

My thoughts exactly! White, Orange, and Green. If it's not broke, it doesn't need fixing, adidas!

I'm cool w/ the black jerseys, since that's what a lot of kids like. Just take off Miami from the front of the jerseys...

 

[Hurracanes]

New uni's next season according to Allcanes.

 

[ThomasM]

Yeah, millions more into the athletic department made NO difference in how much we could pay a coaching staff. What world do some of you live in? If your household brought in an extra 100K a year, do you think it would make do difference in your spending habits?

I will say this... Adidas is a HUGE reason we could hire a coach like Mark Richt. For that reason alone, you won't hear me cry about uniforms for quite some time.

Based on what evidence? Miami tried to hire Richt before we moved to Adidas. Don't mistake our last several bad choices as financial inability to hire well.

With a final two of Edsall and Golden, we weren't offering the kind of money it would have taken to get Coach Richt back in 2010-2011. The Adidas contract helps with that.

You understand that we offered Folden way more than he deserved right? Then, we gave him a raise coming off a beatdown by a 2 win BC team.

We tried to hire Richt. Richt is a loyal guy, and he wasn't leaving UGA of his own volition. He turned UM down before we could get to numbers.

Remember that we also tried to hire Richt AFTER WE SIGNED WITH ADIDAS after we fired Folden. He turned us down that time too because he was loyal to UGA. So there goes your theory on Adidas.

Before we hired Folden, UM was also talking to Jon Gruden. There's no way you're in talks with Gruden not knowing you're going to have to pay him.

Is UF cheap and uncommitted to football because it hired Muschamp for a couple mill? Or how about when it hired Zook for cheap?

Sometimes, you're constrained by the available candidates when your job comes open.

This whole Adidas pulling the strings story is fable. They're not paying all that much more than Nike was paying per year. They have no say in anything.

@ Franchise: Bro, you're making too much sense. The storylines that some of these posters put up become truth on this board. Adidas had zero influence on this hire.

 

[Zbrod95]

I saw this concept design and enjoyed it. Reminds me of the 2001 era

I like these too. Scrap the different helmets and the black jerseys tho. Pretty simple, clean. Looks good to me.

My thoughts exactly! White, Orange, and Green. If it's not broke, it doesn't need fixing, adidas!

I'm cool w/ the black jerseys, since that's what a lot of kids like. Just take off Miami from the front of the jerseys...

Not a fan of the green stripes on the black jerseys and pants. Maybe orange stripe with green outlined letters

 

[ThomasM]

“I don’t think much of it, really,” Richt said, smiling. “I love my alma mater. The U, no doubt about it. But there’s been nobody calling or writing or texting or anything like that. I’m sure they’ll find a great coach.”

That's pretty much asking UM to call. MUCH different than his words a few years back when he was all Georgia.

I will say this... Adidas is a HUGE reason we could hire a coach like Mark Richt. For that reason alone, you won't hear me cry about uniforms for quite some time.

Based on what evidence? Miami tried to hire Richt before we moved to Adidas. Don't mistake our last several bad choices as financial inability to hire well.

With a final two of Edsall and Golden, we weren't offering the kind of money it would have taken to get Coach Richt back in 2010-2011. The Adidas contract helps with that.

You understand that we offered Folden way more than he deserved right? Then, we gave him a raise coming off a beatdown by a 2 win BC team.

We tried to hire Richt. Richt is a loyal guy, and he wasn't leaving UGA of his own volition. He turned UM down before we could get to numbers.

Remember that we also tried to hire Richt AFTER WE SIGNED WITH ADIDAS after we fired Folden. He turned us down that time too because he was loyal to UGA. So there goes your theory on Adidas.

Before we hired Folden, UM was also talking to Jon Gruden. There's no way you're in talks with Gruden not knowing you're going to have to pay him.

Is UF cheap and uncommitted to football because it hired Muschamp for a couple mill? Or how about when it hired Zook for cheap?

Sometimes, you're constrained by the available candidates when your job comes open.

This whole Adidas pulling the strings story is fable. They're not paying all that much more than Nike was paying per year. They have no say in anything.

 

[IndayArtHauz]

I saw this concept design and enjoyed it. Reminds me of the 2001 era

Oh god I'm not ready to do all of this again.

 

[maurice3p]

I want new uni's every season, like Orgeon.

 

[umhurricane2511]

New uni's next season according to Allcanes.

Wat?

 

[Rellyrell]

Yeah, millions more into the athletic department made NO difference in how much we could pay a coaching staff. What world do some of you live in? If your household brought in an extra 100K a year, do you think it would make do difference in your spending habits?

Based on what evidence? Miami tried to hire Richt before we moved to Adidas. Don't mistake our last several bad choices as financial inability to hire well.

With a final two of Edsall and Golden, we weren't offering the kind of money it would have taken to get Coach Richt back in 2010-2011. The Adidas contract helps with that.

You understand that we offered Folden way more than he deserved right? Then, we gave him a raise coming off a beatdown by a 2 win BC team.

We tried to hire Richt. Richt is a loyal guy, and he wasn't leaving UGA of his own volition. He turned UM down before we could get to numbers.

Remember that we also tried to hire Richt AFTER WE SIGNED WITH ADIDAS after we fired Folden. He turned us down that time too because he was loyal to UGA. So there goes your theory on Adidas.

Before we hired Folden, UM was also talking to Jon Gruden. There's no way you're in talks with Gruden not knowing you're going to have to pay him.

Is UF cheap and uncommitted to football because it hired Muschamp for a couple mill? Or how about when it hired Zook for cheap?

Sometimes, you're constrained by the available candidates when your job comes open.

This whole Adidas pulling the strings story is fable. They're not paying all that much more than Nike was paying per year. They have no say in anything.

@ Franchise: Bro, you're making too much sense. The storylines that some of these posters put up become truth on this board. Adidas had zero influence on this hire.

What world do you live in? Real simple question, I don't need an elaborate answer: If Shalala was still here, would Golden still be our coach, yes or no?

 

[Rellyrell]

And another long time Adidas Partner just left; UCLA signed w UA. It wasn't just the $ either...well, that's probably the main reason; but another reason just talking w/ some buddies that work for UCLA athletics, is that Adidas became very "stale" with their attention towards fan products and off field student athlete products.

 

[F-MarioCristobal]

And another long time Adidas Partner just left; UCLA signed w UA. It wasn't just the $ either...well, that's probably the main reason; but another reason just talking w/ some buddies that work for UCLA athletics, is that Adidas became very "stale" with their attention towards fan products and off field student athlete products.

They just signed a 15 year $280 million dollar deal. It was a price that adidas had no interest in matching. It was all about the money just like Miami signing with Adidas. Nike had no interest in matching the price for us.

 

[Rellyrell]

And another long time Adidas Partner just left; UCLA signed w UA. It wasn't just the $ either...well, that's probably the main reason; but another reason just talking w/ some buddies that work for UCLA athletics, is that Adidas became very "stale" with their attention towards fan products and off field student athlete products.

They just signed a 15 year $280 million dollar deal. It was a price that adidas had no interest in matching. It was all about the money just like Miami signing with Adidas. Nike had no interest in matching the price for us.

Oh, no doubt...but if you went to UCLA's message boards, you would see students complain about Adidas gear for a minute, begging UCLA to leave them for either Nike or better yet, UA. I have two clients that attend UCLA and two friends who work for UCLA, one in admin and the other in athletics, and there was a major consensus that when the contract expired, they were jumping ship, regardless. Sales were not good. Granted, UCLA is competing w USC, but there was a real concern on the quality of Adidas fan and off field wear and that the reps weren't coming through like they used to, updating and making things fresh.

 

[Samson Doyo]

I envy Bama when I read these uniform/cleat threads. Painful.

Go Canes!

 

[F-MarioCristobal]

And another long time Adidas Partner just left; UCLA signed w UA. It wasn't just the $ either...well, that's probably the main reason; but another reason just talking w/ some buddies that work for UCLA athletics, is that Adidas became very "stale" with their attention towards fan products and off field student athlete products.

They just signed a 15 year $280 million dollar deal. It was a price that adidas had no interest in matching. It was all about the money just like Miami signing with Adidas. Nike had no interest in matching the price for us.

Oh, no doubt...but if you went to UCLA's message boards, you would see students complain about Adidas gear for a minute, begging UCLA to leave them for either Nike or better yet, UA. I have two clients that attend UCLA and two friends who work for UCLA, one in admin and the other in athletics, and there was a major consensus that when the contract expired, they were jumping ship, regardless. Sales were not good. Granted, UCLA is competing w USC, but there was a real concern on the quality of Adidas fan and off field wear and that the reps weren't coming through like they used to, updating and making things fresh.

I wonder what it has to do with just UCLA not being a national brand.. not even an LA or Cali brand honestly. Like you said they have to compete with USC. But also Stanford, Cal, etc.

No way UCLA is worth $280 million. Adidas probably knew they were leaving when the contract expired so they quit paying them attention. Hopefully that attention gets directed or has already been directed towards the Canes.