I know our deal is coming up soon? Any chance we get anything close to what they are paying UofL?

(04-17-2014 09:00 AM)Maize Wrote:  ESPN Brett McMurphy
Louisville signs 5-year, $40M deal w/@adidas, sources told @espn. Ranks among top 5 college apparel deals

https://mobile.twitter.com/McMurphyESPN

Louisville has signed a five-year, $40 million shoe and apparel deal to remain with adidas, sources told ESPN.com on Thursday.

The deal, through the 2018-19 school year, ranks among the nation's top five shoe and apparel deals for all college programs. Louisville has been affiliated with adidas for the past 16 years.

Louisville, which has been with adidas for 16 years, has signed the shoe and apparel company to a new five-year deal worth $40 million.
In January, Notre Dame and Under Armour announced a 10-year deal worth $90 million, the nation's most valuable, sources told ESPN.com.

Louisville's $8 million per year deal is slightly below Notre Dame's, but similar to that which adidas signed with Michigan (10 years, $82 million).

Louisville's brand has increased dramatically with the Cardinals' recent on-field success. In the 2012-13 school year, Louisville became the first school to win a BCS bowl game (Sugar), have both its men's and women's basketball teams in the Final Four (the men were NCAA champions) and have its baseball team reach the College World Series in the same season.

On July 1, Louisville will move to the Atlantic Coast Conference.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...eal-adidas

Ugh...

The rich get richer.

That's interesting. Obviously gives Adidas a lot of exposure with their recent MBB success. I think Michigan has the biggest Adidas contract, and jealousy over that is what helped drive ND to UA. Wonder how they do with apparel sales, as I would bet UK blows them out of the water in the state and perhaps even in their own city.

i hope we get 2/3 of their deal. right now uofl is a bigger brand...just waiting for the pendulum to swing back uc's way.

(04-17-2014 10:12 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote:  That's interesting. Obviously gives Adidas a lot of exposure with their recent MBB success. I think Michigan has the biggest Adidas contract, and jealousy over that is what helped drive ND to UA. Wonder how they do with apparel sales, as I would bet UK blows them out of the water in the state and perhaps even in their own city.

My parents moved to Louisville after I graduated from high school. In fact, my younger sister is a UofL grad. To explain the dynamics of Louisville, there are divided loyalties between UofL and UK. I would say it is a 65/35 split (I would carve out 5% of that pie for an others category , most comprising of Indiana fans).

Since Louisville does not have a MLB or NFL team, there is a heavy emphasis on college athletics. Everyone in town has either Louisville or UK clothing, hats, bumper stickers, flags, license plates, etc.

Outside of Louisville, the state is very heavy UK country. Louisville has a decent fan base in parts of Western KY (Owensboro, Paducah) but I would in other markets in KY UK has 90% of the fanbase.

By comparison, we have come a long way here in Cincinnati, but our sales are not in the same ballpark in our city as compared to Louisville.

(04-17-2014 10:12 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote:  That's interesting. Obviously gives Adidas a lot of exposure with their recent MBB success. I think Michigan has the biggest Adidas contract, and jealousy over that is what helped drive ND to UA. Wonder how they do with apparel sales, as I would bet UK blows them out of the water in the state and perhaps even in their own city.

With Petrino back and entry into the ACC I'm sure they'll get lots of FB exposure as well.

(04-17-2014 09:22 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  I know our deal is coming up soon? Any chance we get anything close to what they are paying UofL?

No.

Does someone know what we get right now a year from Adidas.

(04-17-2014 02:12 PM)Mark Wolfram Wrote:  Does someone know what we get right now a year from Adidas.

2.5 million. I would expect that to go up with a new contract. UC has a great relationship with Adidas, and UC is one of the few schools under contract with Adidas that is willing to take big swings in terms of design especially on the football side. The only way I can see the Bearcats getting a massive increase from their apparel contract is if Under Armour gets involved. They are still the new kids on the block with only 23 colleges wearing UA. I have no idea if they are still trying to acquire market share, but clothing a school is a relatively cheap way to do that, so they might be willing to overpay a bit.

Here is what Subflea posted about the contract:

Quote:Post: #1adidas contract

Here is all of it. 179 pages of emails about negotiations, the contract, amendments to it, etc.

http://b3.caspio.com/dpImages.aspx?appke...ID=1764269

The nitty gritty.

The current deal runs through June of 2015.

Equipment and apparel allowance is $2,050,000.
$500k in cash
BCS game bonus of $50k
National championship bonus of $250k

There are other bonuses for various championships for other sports.

Louisville has the same amount of money in the contract, but they take $150k more for apparel allowance and $150k less in cash. Texas A&M, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, Kansas, and UCLA are the only adidas schools with bigger contracts. Those last three being significantly bigger than any other schools and any other brands. Wisconsin is interesting in that they only take $800k in apparel, but $2.65 million in cash.

More stuff here:

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/blog...9&page=all

http://csnbbs.com/thread-669576.html

Thanks to the last two posters for the info. So Louisville was basically making the same amount we were and have received a $5.5-6M/yr raise.

Hopefuly we can at least double our current contract. With our puny TV contract, we need all the revenue we can get from outside sources.

There has been an UA rumor going around but I think it is just a rumor at this point. I think UC can increase there deal close to Louisville's level. Color scheme and primary logos look great on gear. Bearcats also have a wealth of secondary logos, vintage logos, and retro designs to pick from too. Cats have not been afraid to wear infrared and or whatever color scheme and design Adidas or Nike has used for UC.

Thanks. I was thinking with our BBALL success the last few years we should be able to double what ever we are getting now.

I hate UA.

(04-17-2014 03:28 PM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote:  I hate UA.

Not a fan of UA either but Adidas has some really bad junk out there too. Anyone who owns a go-to tee knows what I am talking about. Their premium products are nice and the players gear looks good.

I think UC's has of things going for it that should help UC land a nice deal. In conference realignment the bottom schools are brought up by the top schools while apparel deals stand for themselves. Instability is based on a team's wins and losses and not their conference. UC for the most part as been good for the last two decades in at least one of the major sports and most recently both football and basketball. Color scheme is great, doesn't hurt that another local Cincinnati sports team uses Red and Black in their gear too because a lot Bearcat apparel can be worn your Reds apparel from a fashion standpoint. UC's current trademarks and College Vault marks provide a lot of options in terms of designs.

i like working out in UA gear and hate addidas fan gear.

as for sports teams....like addidas uc uniforms hate UA uniforms

Will UC get a better deal on the next contract? Sure. They're on a nice trajectory and are a growing program. Will it be a Louisville level deal? I'll be pleasantly surprised if it is. As others have posted, Louisville athletics is a poor benchmark for UC since they are not in a major league city and are the de facto pro team in their town. I'm sure they're selling more merchandise than UC right now and playing in the ACC: Florida State and Clemson in football; UNC and Duke in basketball in the coming years will only strengthen their brand and marketability.

My understanding is that the Adidas deal has been very good for UC; a big improvement in revenue and player gear from Nike. But I say if UA wants to outbid Adidas, UC should take the money and run.

(04-18-2014 08:02 AM)indycat Wrote:  Will UC get a better deal on the next contract? Sure. They're on a nice trajectory and are a growing program. Will it be a Louisville level deal? I'll be pleasantly surprised if it is. As others have posted, Louisville athletics is a poor benchmark for UC since they are not in a major league city and are the de facto pro team in their town. I'm sure they're selling more merchandise than UC right now and playing in the ACC: Florida State and Clemson in football; UNC and Duke in basketball in the coming years will only strengthen their brand and marketability.

My understanding is that the Adidas deal has been very good for UC; a big improvement in revenue and player gear from Nike. But I say if UA wants to outbid Adidas, UC should take the money and run.

I would take highest bid and run with it too unless the coaches have a very strong preference. The good new is that UA wants to get into the college sports market and Adidas wants to protect their market share. I don't see Nike making a bid for UC. Louisville's bird head logo is easily confused with other teams that use Cardinals as their mascot. The C-Paw and the older Bearcat marks used in retro gear have a lot of brand equity. I would rank the C-Paw in the top 20 of college logos based on style and recognition.

(04-18-2014 08:21 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  

(04-18-2014 08:02 AM)indycat Wrote:  Will UC get a better deal on the next contract? Sure. They're on a nice trajectory and are a growing program. Will it be a Louisville level deal? I'll be pleasantly surprised if it is. As others have posted, Louisville athletics is a poor benchmark for UC since they are not in a major league city and are the de facto pro team in their town. I'm sure they're selling more merchandise than UC right now and playing in the ACC: Florida State and Clemson in football; UNC and Duke in basketball in the coming years will only strengthen their brand and marketability.

My understanding is that the Adidas deal has been very good for UC; a big improvement in revenue and player gear from Nike. But I say if UA wants to outbid Adidas, UC should take the money and run.

I would take highest bid and run with it too unless the coaches have a very strong preference. The good new is that UA wants to get into the college sports market and Adidas wants to protect their market share. I don't see Nike making a bid for UC. Louisville's bird head logo is easily confused with other teams that use Cardinals as their mascot. The C-Paw and the older Bearcat marks used in retro gear have a lot of brand equity. I would rank the C-Paw in the top 20 of college logos based on style and recognition.

All good points. The C-Paw is among the very best (and most unique) designs in collegiate sports and I'm guessing one of the most recognizable nationally. I can't support that recognition factor with any research but my own anecdotal evidence is from travel across the country and people commenting on the Bearcats when they recognize the C-Paw on a polo shirt or sweater I'm wearing.

It's great to be a Bearcat.