MEGA New Miami Adidas Ultraboost🔥 - The Shoe and Nike/Adidas Thread.

LOL Nancy, I wasn't even talking about you. Or anyone on here. I meant what's going on out here in the world over this. I think its a dumb campaign, but I also don't give a flying **** who wears a bra on twitter.

You are so tightly-wound and thin-skinned, my dude. You get triggered so easily. Have a V8. On me!

GIF by BNN MĂ©xico

Karenical Envelopment strikes again.

Congratulations, I award you 20 virtue points for your porst.
 
Advertisement
Karenical Envelopment strikes again.

Congratulations, I award you 20 virtue points for your porst.

So you misguidedly start **** out of the blue with someone who wasn't even talking about you because you misinterpreted a post, and now that you actually know you missed you are still digging in? You just made my point better than I could. Thanks for that.

Trigger Reaction GIF by MOODMAN
 
Advertisement
That's not a JD hat. That's a dunce cap.

That entire first paragraph is one of the dumbest, most short-sighted, most reality-denying paragraphs I've ever seen.

Sure. Yes. Just declare a BREACH OF CONTRACT and walk away...

BUT TO WHERE?

Are you suggesting we run into the waiting arms of Under Armour or New Balance? Or that our sports teams compete in the nude?

Maybe...and just hear me out on this...we might need a couple of years to rebuild the relationship with Nike, to the point where they WANT to bid on our deal...and will not just offer pennies on the dollar because our sports teams are scrimmaging under "shirts-and-skins" rules...

So, sure, continued to be "bothered about the logic utilized by our Nike supporters". And PLEASE feel free to tell me about all that "Board of Trustees oversight" during the Beta Blake era. I've always been a big fan of science fiction.

You know something, I continue to be "bothered about the logic utilized by our two adidas/Beta Blake supporters". I have no idea why they keep talking about how the UM administration was watching Beta Blake like a hawk (when they weren't). After all, if you two are soooo correct, then there was NO NEED for President Frenk to appoint Joe Echevarria and Rudy Fernandez to review our Athletic Department, right?

Ooops, you didn't think about THAT ONE, did ya?

Just keep yapping about guaranteed money. Then tell me what kind of a deal we sign with Nike in the next year. THEN we can have a discussion.
Going by your logic, if an industry is a duopoly, breach of contract clauses do not exist. Do you realize how insane that is? If you aren’t willing to stand up and at least attempt to enforce the contract, you lose all credibility and leverage anyway. Again, if the deal is that bad and there are numerous breaches of said deal, it would be a dereliction of duty by the legal team to not enforce those clauses up to and including the most extreme remedy, litigating for breach of contract. That’s first week of contract law stuff.

Guess what? If you have to go that direction, you are basically a free agent, what that looks like can range from Miami taking a short term deal with Nike, UA, or NB, or purchasing their own team apparel from a source and like the Cowboys did in the 90s when they were between Apex and Nike and not have a manufacturer logo on their gear. There are MULTIPLE examples of entities figuring this out. Frankly, I don’t think that Adidas is willing to burn Miami like that because it filters down.
 
Going by your logic, if an industry is a duopoly, breach of contract clauses do not exist. Do you realize how insane that is? If you aren’t willing to stand up and at least attempt to enforce the contract, you lose all credibility and leverage anyway. Again, if the deal is that bad and there are numerous breaches of said deal, it would be a dereliction of duty by the legal team to not enforce those clauses up to and including the most extreme remedy, litigating for breach of contract. That’s first week of contract law stuff.

Guess what? If you have to go that direction, you are basically a free agent, what that looks like can range from Miami taking a short term deal with Nike, UA, or NB, or purchasing their own team apparel from a source and like the Cowboys did in the 90s when they were between Apex and Nike and not have a manufacturer logo on their gear. There are MULTIPLE examples of entities figuring this out. Frankly, I don’t think that Adidas is willing to burn Miami like that because it filters down.


Riiiight.

You cite one NFL example from the 1990s related to uniforms, and simply ignore that we get most of our equipment from adidas.

Other than that, brilliant analysis...
 
Hoops, Cali and you each with a differing point of view to argue?

Good lord we’re gonna be here awhile.
I didnt argue I just like Lululemon apparel. also, I wouldn't expect people to get that their clothing is insanely comfortable and actually got into casual wear now (you can get dress shirts, polos, and slacks from them and beat the **** out of anything from Nike Adidas UA etc.). there are two new brands out there that rival Lulu in comfort. if its good enough for jimmy butler to outfit his line, its good enough for the canes
 
I didnt argue I just like Lululemon apparel. also, I wouldn't expect people to get that their clothing is insanely comfortable and actually got into casual wear now (you can get dress shirts, polos, and slacks from them and beat the **** out of anything from Nike Adidas UA etc.). there are two new brands out there that rival Lulu in comfort. if its good enough for jimmy butler to outfit his line, its good enough for the canes
I’m a fan of Legends brand though 99% of this board would trash it because they’d look like trash in it.
 
Advertisement
Ight I'll respond @TheOriginalCane lol

I fully understand this lol. BUT just because something is bigger on the back end obviously doesn't mean you are guaranteed OR likely to surpass the significantly larger front-end figures. Again, this is all VERY basic math that I have no doubt the People at Nike and in our administration were more than capable of estimating. Given they knew what the sales figures were for the last 30 years, I'm sure they could make a very basic prediction. And I have never said ONCE that it isn't POSSIBLE to make more on the backend from the Nike structure. But should you bet on that? EX) Look at NFL player contracts. Do you think players would prefer to have low Front-end guarantees because they have high performance based incentives on the back end? Or do you think they just want the High guarantees? Sure they may be a star, but what if? QBs know full well they will be surpassed before their contract expires, yet they do it anyway.

That brings us to the 2nd point, if Athletic Success doesn't play any factor in how successful our Merch sales are, then why wouldn't Nike be willing to pay more up front? Why do they need their contracts to be so performance driven? Thats why I'm saying we have 8 years of hindsight to go on. And we have basically sucked in football, been meh in baseball, and now are pretty good in basketball. If you're argument is even with these results we are STILL a top selling merch school, AND if it was so obvious that this would be the case, then Nike should have jumped to match the Adidas offer and keep the 30 year partnership alive. The reality is, and I'm literally using Nike doing good business as my evidence, Nike thought Adidas was paying us more than we were worth. That is the OBVIOUS reality of the situation imo. Nike thought Adidas was overpaying us, and resetting the market, and they didn't want to match.

Now the aspect about how Adidas is weaselling their way out of paying us more (like how yall are saying we are supposed to be highest paid in ACC) - if that really is the case, I agree with yall. But that imo is a problem with our administration/lawyers being dumb - NOT by itself evidence that the switch from Nike was a bad move. Because you could simply say if our lawyers had done their job and we had the legal guarantee we'd be the highest paid in the ACC, we'd be making a **** load more and the Nike offer probably wouldn't have even come close for hopefully obvious reasons.



Right, Nike knew what we sold, and wanted to be in business with us. They just didn't want to pay us what Adidas was willing to because their assesment was if they paid us more than they offered they wouldn't profit. Sure they were willing to pay us a lot of money IF we sold a lot of merch, nobody is denying that possibility. And if we didn't have much success on the field and didn't sell much merch... you know like what ended up happening the last 8 years... We're just left with our **** in our hands while we could have been sitting with tens of millions up front.



Wait. Am I supposed to believe Nike didn't agree to match Adidas' deal, instead choosing to not have Miami at all in their portfolio, because they didn't want us converting equipment/gear into money as a way to "enrich" the deal? lmfao, to me that would be evidence of Nike not wanting to pay us. Why should Nike get any say in whether our AD - Whether Dumbass Blake James OR Brilliant Rad - chooses to take equipment/gear or Money? Lol That makes no ******* sense If our AD is an idiot, then Nike should let him be an idiot. It should be of no concern to Nike IF the value of equipment they are sending us is really 1:1 with the cash alternative in the contract. But saying that is a major reason why they were unwilling to pay us larger up front money - matching Adidas deal - makes no sense. Again, this has NOTHING to do with whether Blake was an idiot to do that or not. This is about The Contract with Adidas and Nike and which provided more money. So saying Nike didn't want us "enriching" the contract by converting equipment to Cash doesn't help the argument that the Nike deal would have paid more lol.



I think this is a good point. But I think this is actually the reason why the Contract length is the biggest issue with the switch to Adidas, which just so happens to be something I have REPEATEDLY agreed with @Rellyrell on lol. That is CLEARLY imo the biggest mistake of the Adidas deal. I have zero issue - even after all these months of arguing about which deal would have paid more - with the payment structure. I don't care whether we are paid all on the front-end or all on the backend, as long as we get the most money possible - and in this case I think in the past 8 years the Adidas structure was actually smarter. The problem has always been the contract length and the actual management of the contract itself (talking about Adidas not holding their end of the deal or whatever). So when you say how the market for merch sales has changed (increased due to fanatics and general online increase), that would NOT have been an issue if our contract was up anytime from 2 years ago to now. Because we'd be entering the market again, and potentially resetting it again.
I think I need to caveat this with, I could not care less if we are Nike or Adidas. I buy most of my UM clothes from Homefield Apparel or companies that go more vintage in styles. Genuinely don't care. With that said, I will throw out one other possible factor. @Rellyrell mentioned that Nike has their standard structure of a contract in the form of smaller base and bigger contingencies based on sales. This is not just from a monetary perspective to disincentivize other schools asking for the same. Companies stick to their one format of a deal for a whole bunch of reasons, not the least of which are legal, finance, accounting, etc. are all organized based off of that one format for efficiency, both internally and externally.

There are companies that when they look to sell subsidiaries will out of hand reject anyone that will not do an equity deal and instead insist on an asset purchase, even if the asset purchasers will offer more money. Won't even entertain it because they have spent a LOT of time and money organizing their departments in a specific manner.

The assertion or thought that Nike would automatically want to match the terms of Adidas's contract if they could save a million a year or whatever is misguided from a business perspective.

I happen to agree with you about the school's legal department at the time holding significant responsibility. Look at the number of issues we had during those years just with athletics that wound up getting out. Shannon's contract termination, Golden's contract termination, Arkansas St., etc. God knows what didn't get out or make the press athletically, let alone with the rest of the school. The entire culture of the school had a clear quality oversight issue, and it is probably why a guy who ran Deloitte was brought in to fix it.
 
I didnt argue I just like Lululemon apparel. also, I wouldn't expect people to get that their clothing is insanely comfortable and actually got into casual wear now (you can get dress shirts, polos, and slacks from them and beat the **** out of anything from Nike Adidas UA etc.). there are two new brands out there that rival Lulu in comfort. if its good enough for jimmy butler to outfit his line, its good enough for the canes
@Rellyrell I don’t see this…

B18E9028-4D27-41D4-BC56-1537B9A3A42B.gif
 
go spoil yourself and get some work out gear from them. you wont go back. nike is **** in quality and same with Adidas and UA. they were fine when I was broke in undergrad. they suck when you afford the better things in life
I’m very familiar with lululemon. My ex taught yoga and had tons of it when it wasn’t as known.

I’m good man. I don’t care about this stuff. Like @TheOriginalCane essentially said, I’m only here to stir the pot for @Andrew to get clicks off the drama.
 
Advertisement
go spoil yourself and get some work out gear from them. you wont go back. nike is **** in quality and same with Adidas and UA. they were fine when I was broke in undergrad. they suck when you afford the better things in life


I'm sure we'll sell a lot of t-shirts with that big ****** logo...


il_794xN.4558288643_4uth.jpg
 
Advertisement
Misgendering is bigotry.

Agree 100%. But from the article I read, this is basically an influencer guy in drag who has changed their pronouns a few times. But ****, most of what's out there are attack pieces right now so who knows? I wasn't familiar with this person. I'm not even sure what to call them? him? her?, if I knew, I would. I really don't think it's too much to ask to change what you call someone by a word if it makes them happy. Him, her, they, whatever. Life is hard enough for many.
 
Riiiight.

You cite one NFL example from the 1990s related to uniforms, and simply ignore that we get most of our equipment from adidas.

Other than that, brilliant analysis...
Miami gets their equipment from Adidas, doesn’t mean Miami can’t purchase equipment from somewhere else until a new deal gets done. Think baseball teams and bats. There are Adidas schools that had preexisting deals on bats, and those deals remain in place. Certain sports use equipment that isn’t made by either Nike or Adidas and are equipped accordingly.

I wouldn’t be shocked if some companies tried to get piecemeal deals in place, due to visibility. For example, a company like Jordan brand may want to outfit shoes for the basketball program, especially with the run L and Meier had, just because people see our program regularly. There are different ways to approach this situation if it came to that.

You’d think Rad and his staff would have contingencies in place if that had to happen, which as I said earlier is the most extreme remedy. Honestly, it would be easier to wind down the Adidas contract behind closed doors, and go back on the market. The largest obstacle is how long the contract runs, if you can get out from under that, it opens up possibilities.
 
Miami gets their equipment from Adidas, doesn’t mean Miami can’t purchase equipment from somewhere else until a new deal gets done. Think baseball teams and bats. There are Adidas schools that had preexisting deals on bats, and those deals remain in place. Certain sports use equipment that isn’t made by either Nike or Adidas and are equipped accordingly.

I wouldn’t be shocked if some companies tried to get piecemeal deals in place, due to visibility. For example, a company like Jordan brand may want to outfit shoes for the basketball program, especially with the run L and Meier had, just because people see our program regularly. There are different ways to approach this situation if it came to that.

You’d think Rad and his staff would have contingencies in place if that had to happen, which as I said earlier is the most extreme remedy. Honestly, it would be easier to wind down the Adidas contract behind closed doors, and go back on the market. The largest obstacle is how long the contract runs, if you can get out from under that, it opens up possibilities.

There is zero chance Nike/Jordan would touch a program where they didn't have the whole AD enchilada.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top