| NEWS Alabama athletics faces $75 million shortfall, AD tells donors - AL.com

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

There is one aspect of that I seldom see mentioned: Battle agreed to the extension a long time before it was announced and that date goes back to before we see that huge increase in payouts from shoe deals. The contract with Nike and UA was in 2013. Nike deal with Michigan, as one example, happened in 2015.

People got ticked off at Battle because they learned of the deal in 2018. I truly believe we wouldn't have seen the outlash if it was announced in 2013 when it was agreed upon. But hey, mentioning 2013 in 2018 doesn't carry as much 'weight' in news articles as pointing to UM in 2015 and comparing it to the press release from UA in 2018.

Can we get mad at Battle for not seeing the market change in the future? I suppose if we also believe he was supposed to see in the future.

I love Battle, but I can't let him off the hook for that one. Hell, I may have done the same thing, but I'm a moron, not a successful businessman. I remember back at the time of the secret extension there were even folks on message boards counting down the days until the contract was up, knowing that Bama was in a prime spot for a huge contact based on the exposure that football was getting (along with some other sports). The one thing that stood out about it, is why keep it quiet at the time? You rarely see that. Did he know it wasn't a great deal for UA, even if needed at the time, so no release was issued? The whole thing just seemed odd. I can't remember when it ends now exactly, but seems like it is right around the time Saban could legitimately go to the lake for good.

 

[OldPlayer]

Hopefully not eliminated completely....just postponed til the financial crisis is handled....

Eliminated as in no more. They are honoring the scholarships until graduation or departure but will not have any practices or events.

 

[TerryP]

I love Battle, but I can't let him off the hook for that one. Hell, I may have done the same thing, but I'm a moron, not a successful businessman. I remember back at the time of the secret extension there were even folks on message boards counting down the days until the contract was up, knowing that Bama was in a prime spot for a huge contact based on the exposure that football was getting (along with some other sports). The one thing that stood out about it, is why keep it quiet at the time? You rarely see that. Did he know it wasn't a great deal for UA, even if needed at the time, so no release was issued? The whole thing just seemed odd. I can't remember when it ends now exactly, but seems like it is right around the time Saban could legitimately go to the lake for good.

How are they counting down the days to a big pay day when there wasn't a big pay day to be found? I can see some may have asked about the contract, but counting down to what, Brandon?

In 2014, when Nebraska signed their new deal it was for four million plus a few "bonuses" here and there (students got a little, ushers as well, etc.) This new contract was a year after Alabama's and worth about 500K more.

In 2014, Michigan still had the most lucrative deal. They were still with Adidas. At that time UM was getting 4.4MM in equipment/apparel and an additional 3.5MM+ for the right to cloth the teams.

Should Alabama's have been comparable to Michigan? No. Michigan has 13 men's program alone. Alabama has 15 in total; men's and women's.

Interesting side note: at that time UCLA had the second biggest deal that was roughly 500K less than Michigan's. Fast forward two years later and we saw their highly publicized contract with UA: a deal we discussed here a few months ago when UA started proceeding to get out of the deal.

Like I've said, all of this is after Alabama signed their deal; a deal worth 63MM plus a 5MM signing bonus.

Like you, I recall people talking about the contract and when it expired. However, I don't recall people talking about it until after that "gold rush" hit. I don't see how they could be thinking it was going to be comparable to what Michigan signed a few years later. The mega-money deals didn't start until after Bama signed.

That's what the vast majority don't realize or know; perhaps some simply choosing to ignore.

That said, that deal in '13 wasn't as much as the one Texas had recently signed as well as a few other schools. Texas has 16 programs but also was sitting on the LHN which had been running since 2011.

**The "Business Journal" first began tracking contract deals with schools in 2013. The figures I've repeated above are whey they released in their reports in 2014. Their database followed what Equity in Athletics had started several years before in covering expenses and revenues. It was followed by the USA Today database about coach's salaries and compensation packages.

EDIT: By the way, now that I think about it, there was an extension signed in 2010. Why would fan be talking about a 2018 new contract, in 2012 and 2013, when the extension was a mere two/three years old?

To me this whole ordeal came from a few bitching about the new contract after they found out the details without bothering to go back and look how it came about. Their vitriol voiced on message forums was picked up by a lot who didn't take the time to look at it in more detail and just went with the crowd. That's how I see it all coming about looking back.

 

[mando]

I don't care for the idea of borrowing to stay afloat.

That works for awhile. It comes down to things returning to some form of normalcy in a reasonable amount of time so you do not need to keep borrowing.

I suppose if we also believe he was supposed to see in the future.

He was paid a lot of money to forecast the future but yes he can be wrong well because it is projecting the future.

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

How are they counting down the days to a big pay day when there wasn't a big pay day to be found? I can see some may have asked about the contract, but counting down to what, Brandon?

There were people who were anxiously waiting for the year when the Nike contract ran out (which I guess was '18 according to your post, I couldn't remember the exact year) because the feeling was Alabama was in a prime spot for a massive deal. Battle apparently felt that an extension/re-negotiation in 2013 was the best call. That's fine, but there were others who would have waited and ridden the wave in the same situation. To me, its comparable in a way to the Braves (Nike) locking up Acuna (Bama) last year. It was a great deal for the Braves, and Acuna must have been fine with it, because he had held the cards and still signed it... but did he get his projected worth?

 

[TerryP]

He was paid a lot of money to forecast the future but yes he can be wrong well because it is projecting the future

What you're suggesting is athletic departments should have known Under Armour (UA) was going to change the face of the market before Under Armour was changing the face of the market. At that time, who was paying attention to UA and what they're next contract bids were going to consist of? People within the company is the group that's limited to in this case. It was their 2013 investors meeting where they announced their goals for doubling the size of their reach. It was January of 2014 when they announced their deal with Notre Dame...and there's where the ball starts rolling. In 2015 we see UM's deal...and so on.

 

[TerryP]

There were people who were anxiously waiting for the year when the Nike contract ran out (which I guess was '18 according to your post, I couldn't remember the exact year) because the feeling was Alabama was in a prime spot for a massive deal. Battle apparently felt that an extension/re-negotiation in 2013 was the best call. That's fine, but there were others who would have waited and ridden the wave in the same situation. To me, its comparable in a way to the Braves (Nike) locking up Acuna (Bama) last year. It was a great deal for the Braves, and Acuna must have been fine with it, because he had held the cards and still signed it... but did he get his projected worth?

The first ran out in '18 after it's renewal/extension in 2010. The current is through 2025 as I recall.

In this case, yes, it was good for Nike. I have a hard time believing Nike knew what was going to happen or they wouldn't have let UA grab a TV mainstay like Notre Dame in 2014.

Let's not forget Adidas was the front runner with the large contracts back then. They held the top five all to themselves with UA and Nike sharing 6-10.

Tennessee started their last contract with Nike a year after Alabama. They were getting more just like Nebraska but not much. Auburn followed UT by a year with UA and received more than the Vols. But, like UCLA, that's tanking as we speak. They've lost quite a bit there.

As a side note, a year following Spurrier quitting UofSC he was still getting paid from UA. In that contract some of that money went to the coaching staff. How that applies with Nike and Alabama? I know it's there. I don't know how much.

Projected worth. Interesting thought, Brandon. When I weigh it against what the other schools were doing with Nike after Bama it looks like a question no one knew the answer for OR no one was asking. Again, I can't say here.

 

[BamaFan334]

And we're left with a football program like we saw in the 80's.

This "nonsensical spending" has increased the revenue of the athletic department by 82+% since 2006. Since when does it lack sense to spend money to make money?

And, once again, one has nothing to do with the other. The improvements we see around the athletic complex aren't derived from the same monies as the shortfall mentioned here. Schools' athletic departments don't operate the way you're suggesting. If fact, this "rainy day fund" you're suggesting means millions taken away from the academic side. Alabama, being one of the few that actually has a profit, gives money back to the institution and you want that to change?

There is a building fund. There is an operational fund. The shortfall comes from the latter.

I'm not talking about the spending back in 2006, or even the spending after the windfall from Saban. I'm talking about the continued extravagance. I understand the upgrades and getting the tools needed to set the standard, but I was speaking to the lavish added options after the fact.

Your comment about money going back to the school, it's a great thing and proud my university does it. BUT, you take care of your athletes first. They are the ones the money was made from, take care of them first. The school charges bullshit fee after bullshit fee anyways to the other 35,000 students, so if they get less from the athletic department, then they should find their own way to support their spending. You can't help but think they over extend themselves with their lavish plans as well. It was great being in the business school and seeing the difference from where it was to where it was going, but I learned just as much in the old rooms as the most updated rooms. My fitute would have appreciated less in tuition expense and gotten the same degree. Science, engineering, and nursing are programs that need to stay on the cutting edge since we are working to build those schools. It got us Da'Shawn Hand.

As far as the spending breakdown, I did not know that it was from different funds. I can't help but think they cross paths somewhere along the line.

As far as Byrne is concerned, all he has shown me is he can tweet and goof around on social media. The Crimson Standard, I still believe you and I could have sold our boosters on that and envisioned the changes the patrons would have wanted.

A lot are hung up on the Nike deal, but I don't seem to care about that. I feel our revenue streams from television, apparel, and other vendors make us plenty of money. That extra Nike money wouldn't save this shortfall, and moat likely would have been spent YEARS ago! I let that one go and don't ever get into that discussion.

 

[TerryP]

I'm not talking about the spending back in 2006, or even the spending after the windfall from Saban. I'm talking about the continued extravagance. I understand the upgrades and getting the tools needed to set the standard, but I was speaking to the lavish added options after the fact.

Lavish. Extravagant. Examples? Are you talking about some of the 'bells and whistles' around the Moore complex?

The Crimson Standard, I still believe you and I could have sold our boosters on that and envisioned the changes the patrons would have wanted.

Having known two people who did that for a living, no I don't believe you could accomplish the same thing. I know I couldn't. It's not just an ordinary sales pitch and the love our Alum have for UA isn't enough in most of these situations. And, if I may add, the two guys I know are 'soliciting' donations from a far, far richer fan base than Alabama's. In one case, a school with far more tradition than any found in the SEC (non athletic in this case.) The other is on the athletic side, on the other side of the country, with a school that's not playing this fall.

I do not consider Byrne to be a man, or AD, without fault. I do believe he's given the short stick, a lot.