ND just switched from Addias to Under Armour.


http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...der-armour



@darrenrovell: Hearing Under Armour/Notre Dame deal will be largest deal in total $ committed in all of college sports licensing.

Wow. Didn't see that coming. I wonder if ND felt addidas wasn't creating enough product for them.

ND has been branching on with the Shamrock Series. UA is going to take that to a whole new level.

It says licensing, so it could simply mean merch sales. Louisville is an Adidas school, but they too recently signed a deal with Under Armor for merch as well. Doesn't necessarily mean they're switching from Adidas on the field...though if they are, I agree that it's huge.

(01-14-2014 07:46 AM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  It says licensing, so it could simply mean merch sales. Louisville is an Adidas school, but they too recently signed a deal with Under Armor for merch as well. Doesn't necessarily mean they're switching from Adidas on the field...though if they are, I agree that it's huge.

We're switching the whole thing... Heck Adidas gear is marked 25-50% already at the bookstore!

That's an interesting move. Honestly, I'm surprised UofL didn't have some sort of exclusivity agreement with Adidas that prevented the UA deal. I know if I were Adidas, I wouldn't like that deal AT ALL.

(01-14-2014 09:28 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  That's an interesting move. Honestly, I'm surprised UofL didn't have some sort of exclusivity agreement with Adidas that prevented the UA deal. I know if I were Adidas, I wouldn't like that deal AT ALL.

WVU has an Under Armor side deal too. Seems pretty common

Once again Notre Dame shows they are not team players in the ACC

It might be common because Adidas doesn't have enough leverage. I doubt UA has any deals at Nike schools. Seriously, Adidas pays for ALL of our sports teams' gear, and we're going to also license merchandise with Under Armour??

I never understood how this benefits either side.

The only way UA, Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc make money off this is by taking a larger cut for the apparel they sell to fans than they would without the sponsorship deal. But the school could just as easily source their merchandise through a generic brand, and they'd probably make more money doing that because costs would be lower. It's not like fans care whether they're getting an Adidas ND shirt or a generic brand ND shirt, so sales would be the same.

(01-14-2014 11:57 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I never understood how this benefits either side.

The only way UA, Nike, Adidas, Reebok, etc make money off this is by taking a larger cut for the apparel they sell to fans than they would without the sponsorship deal. But the school could just as easily source their merchandise through a generic brand, and they'd probably make more money doing that because costs would be lower. It's not like fans care whether they're getting an Adidas ND shirt or a generic brand ND shirt, so sales would be the same.

Fans most certainly care about brand. Everyone cares about brand to an extent. I'm assuming you drive a yugo since you don't care about brand so much.

(01-14-2014 11:36 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  It might be common because Adidas doesn't have enough leverage. I doubt UA has any deals at Nike schools. Seriously, Adidas pays for ALL of our sports teams' gear, and we're going to also license merchandise with Under Armour??

WVU is a Nike Elite school meaning that they supply every one of our teams with their uniforms and gear, we also have an Under Armor side deal...

The $$ numbers being rumored are $10 million a year for ten years.

No links yet, just rumors.

Glad to see a Maryland business and UMD alum doing so well

(01-14-2014 05:00 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(01-14-2014 11:36 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  It might be common because Adidas doesn't have enough leverage. I doubt UA has any deals at Nike schools. Seriously, Adidas pays for ALL of our sports teams' gear, and we're going to also license merchandise with Under Armour??

WVU is a Nike Elite school meaning that they supply every one of our teams with their uniforms and gear, we also have an Under Armor side deal...

Am I the only one who finds this odd? I don't mean WVU specifically. It just seems strange that these companies would not push for exclusivity.

It's odd, but I don't think many companies can afford an exclusivity agreement. Lots of money comes to Universities from Licensing their brand. And why would a University like UC want to sign an exclusivity agreement with Adidas that would limit the stores our product is sold in. It's good that people can buy crappy gear at Walmart and nicer gear at Victoria's Secret. Spreading your brand is more important than the label of the manufacturer.

Sorry, I'm just envisioning Bearcat panties now...

(01-16-2014 07:44 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Sorry, I'm just envisioning Bearcat panties now...

Apparel licensing FTW.

(01-16-2014 10:59 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  

(01-14-2014 05:00 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(01-14-2014 11:36 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  It might be common because Adidas doesn't have enough leverage. I doubt UA has any deals at Nike schools. Seriously, Adidas pays for ALL of our sports teams' gear, and we're going to also license merchandise with Under Armour??

WVU is a Nike Elite school meaning that they supply every one of our teams with their uniforms and gear, we also have an Under Armor side deal...

Am I the only one who finds this odd? I don't mean WVU specifically. It just seems strange that these companies would not push for exclusivity.

Going 100% with one company could cut down on options for your patrons. ECU uses Nike for everything but in terms of ECU apparel you can get you can get Under Armor, New Era, Russell Athletic, Zeypher Hats, and a few others. I think the only major ones we don't have are Addidas or Reebok ( or at least I haven't seen anything).

College athletics. It's not about the money, but the athletes, even at ND.