forums

Nike is BYKE.

BWCD said:
Yikes. The biggest I've had to go up to in any Adidas has been 2XL. But...I'm on the GLP1's now and slimming down...so maybe it won't be as big of a factor lol.
Click to expand...
GLP-1s + Nike + Winning

Think About It GIF by Identity
 
shumbly33 said:
Does this get us back in the game for any of these recruitments I thought were done and dusted?

Nike HS NIL Class:
-Jaxon Dollar: Class of ‘27 (UGA - Nike)
-Madoxx Davis: Class of ‘28 (should be committing to O$U any minute)
Click to expand...

Only two on the list I'm curious about.
 
USNAVYCANE said:
What’s record setting about it ? Didn’t pedo st sign a 300 million dollar deal?
Click to expand...


From Gemini


HEADLINE VS. CASH BREAKDOWN


Penn State (Adidas):


  • Headline Value: $300 Million ($30M/year)
  • Cash Component: ~40% to 50% ($12M to $15M/year)
  • Product / Gear Allotment: ~50% to 60% (valued at retail MSRP)
  • Structure: Backloaded with high product caps

Miami (Nike):


  • Headline Value: $200+ Million (~$20M+/year)
  • Cash Component: ~67% (two-thirds cash, ~$13M to $14M/year)
  • Product / Gear Allotment: 33% ($6.5M to $7M/year retail allowance)
  • Structure: High baseline cash liquidity from Day 1

THE REAL VALUE REALITY CHECK


  • Cash Parity Paradox: Despite Penn State boasting a headline figure 50% larger ($300M vs. $200M), both schools net almost the exact same liquid cash per year (~$13M to $14M annually).
  • Retail Markups: The difference is largely driven by Penn State accepting tens of millions more in retail-priced gear allowances. Surplus gear cannot fund coaching buyouts, facility debt, or athlete revenue-sharing obligations.
  • Cost-to-Brand vs. Value-to-School: Gear allotments cost apparel companies only a fraction of retail to produce, meaning Adidas provides far less hard value than the $30M/year headline implies. Nike commits hard cash for two-thirds of Miami's total package.

WHY INSIDERS FAVOR MIAMI'S DEAL


  • Liquidity in the Revenue-Sharing Era: Penn State turned down an upfront cash-heavy Nike offer to pursue Adidas's bloated gear package. In contrast, Miami prioritized hard cash to cover immediate student-athlete payments.
  • Institutional Optics: Penn State faced board pushback and scrutiny over an unusual $500,000 annual product allotment earmarked for the athletic director. Miami secured a clean, standard institutional structure without personal administrator carve-outs.
  • Department Scale & Efficiency: Miami sponsors roughly 18 to 19 varsity sports compared to Penn State's 31. Miami avoided surplus gear it did not need and captured the cash instead.

Penn State took the larger public headline, but Miami secured virtually equal annual spendable cash with significantly cleaner governance.
 
Noliaboi said:
Yesssss!!! I was so tired of our players having those thin, loose, long *** pants! 😩
Click to expand...
Never again my friend! Never again! We will now get to see our players in a uniform that is actually executed well for football.

We all can love adidas classic design. I also agree, but they have no idea what the **** they are doing as it relates to overall execution of an American football jersey:

-Pants that don’t fit
- no collar on uniforms for many years resulting in the famous “W” on our jersey
- pads popping out left and right because of the material used
-tire marks on jerseys for years
- our players looking like plumbers out there with their pants falling down.
- the above has improved but it still is an awful fitting football pant.

Nike needs to nail the classic design like adidas did after many many interactions. But what all of us can now look forward to is having a check on the jersey again which means the company making the uniform actually knows what the **** they are doing when making an American football jersey.

This is a **** good day for a fan like myself who only cares about how our uniforms/brand looks on television plus the money. All the other stuff such as fan gear, etc I don’t care about.

Great day
 
Back
Top