🏈 Alabama, Nike, and the apparel contract renewal coming up soon.

[OldPlayer]

Don't expect it to be the biggest. Schools like Stanford have many more teams to outfit and Nike pays to do it.

I came across this article this afternoon. I'm thinking that if Bama signed the largest to date the last time the contract was rewnewed there's no reason why they should get the biggest this time around as well.

Tide now has most lucrative Nike deal in college sports

According to this list from earlier in 2018, Alabama isn't in the top 20 (among all schools, all brands)
The 20 Most Valuable College Apparel Deals

 

[planomateo]

Look at when those top 20 deals were signed...]

 

[TerryP]

@OldPlayer, UNC is an interesting comparison. When he was being interviewed about their recent deal with NIKE their athletic director mentioned mentioned two things that caught my attention. One, they were signing with the Jordan branch of NIKE and two, the larger contract are driven by football.

It's my understanding--based on the articles I've read--that the Jordan brand doesn't pay as much as the simple NIKE brand. (I don't know if it is of note or not, but one thing I noticed in the last week is Coach Avery Johnson has been seen at these recruiting stops sporting the Jordan brand.)

"Driven by football." That puts Bama in a different league than what we see from the leading contracts mentioned in the article you linked.

The AD at UNC went on to mention schools that switch brands end up getting bigger contracts than those who stay with their current sponsor. It's one reason that we see schools like South Carolina listed. What's their draw? Football? Meh. Basketball? More so, but still you're looking at a team that doesn't carry as many followers as other schools in the SEC (despite their recent success.)

Texas and Michigan catch my eye. Both are in the area of popularity of Bama football--without the hardware to show for their effort. Louisville, ranked #2, gets it's "eyeballs" from basketball. Another area that may carry the viewers that Bama football receives largely due to the disparity in the number of games. (Louisville's deal with this FBI probe may change the dynamic there paying more because of what they'll represent on the next level: speculation on my part.)

Earlier you mentioned Stanford and the number of sports programs. A very salient point in my opinion. But, to me, there's a catch there.

Apparel deals provide an important revenue stream for athletic departments, sometimes representing roughly 5% of an athletic department budget.

The numbers I read on Stanford reflected over 30% of their budget shortfalls were covered by their endorsement deals.

And another:

For Illinois, having its contract value placed in product allotment was in its best interest. But some industry sources claim that universities should be negotiating for their value to be placed in tangible cash, something that so many athletic departments desperately need.

What's the need for the Athletic department at Bama? Allotment, or cash? With what's happening at Coleman, and the improvements coming for Bryant Denny, I'm led to think they go the cash route.

 

[BamaFan334]

@OldPlayer, UNC is an interesting comparison. When he was being interviewed about their recent deal with NIKE their athletic director mentioned mentioned two things that caught my attention. One, they were signing with the Jordan branch of NIKE and two, the larger contract are driven by football.

It's my understanding--based on the articles I've read--that the Jordan brand doesn't pay as much as the simple NIKE brand. (I don't know if it is of note or not, but one thing I noticed in the last week is Coach Avery Johnson has been seen at these recruiting stops sporting the Jordan brand.)

"Driven by football." That puts Bama in a different league than what we see from the leading contracts mentioned in the article you linked.

The AD at UNC went on to mention schools that switch brands end up getting bigger contracts than those who stay with their current sponsor. It's one reason that we see schools like South Carolina listed. What's their draw? Football? Meh. Basketball? More so, but still you're looking at a team that doesn't carry as many followers as other schools in the SEC (despite their recent success.)

Texas and Michigan catch my eye. Both are in the area of popularity of Bama football--without the hardware to show for their effort. Louisville, ranked #2, gets it's "eyeballs" from basketball. Another area that may carry the viewers that Bama football receives largely due to the disparity in the number of games. (Louisville's deal with this FBI probe may change the dynamic there paying more because of what they'll represent on the next level: speculation on my part.)

Earlier you mentioned Stanford and the number of sports programs. A very salient point in my opinion. But, to me, there's a catch there.

Apparel deals provide animportant revenue stream for athletic departments, sometimes representing roughly 5% of an athletic department budget.

The numbers I read on Stanford reflected over 30% of their budget shortfalls were covered by their endorsement deals.

And another:

For Illinois, having its contract value placed in product allotment was in its best interest. But some industry sources claim that universities should be negotiating for their value to be placed in tangible cash, something that so many athletic departments desperately need.

What's the need for the Athletic department at Bama? Allotment, or cash? With what's happening at Coleman, and the improvements coming for Bryant Denny, I'm led to think they go the cash route.

I hope we stay away from the Jordan brand. Oklahoma will be wearing it this Fall.

I too noticed some of those schools on that list and can only think of it as Under Armour and Adidas needing to make a splash to say "here we are" in a lucrative industry like college sports. No way Louisville and UCLA deserve the money with their on the field production. Looking at the numbers, Alabama is near/at the top in every category with the production to go with it. Doubt we top UCLA's goofy numbers and contract, but Nike will pay a premium to keep us. Wouldn't be shocked if we become the #1 Nike contract though.

 

[OldPlayer]

Yes, many of the big contracts are with schools who were paid big $$$ to switch - specifically Under Armour (and UA's financial performance has taken a beating). But Michigan football is wearing the Jordan brand (that doesn't pay as much?). I think the Jordan vs Nike is six or a half dozen. Nike wants more exposure for the Jordan brand and may give an extra incentive in those contracts.

 

[Max]

Yes, many of the big contracts are with schools who were paid big $$$ to switch - specifically Under Armour (and UA's financial performance has taken a beating). But Michigan football is wearing the Jordan brand (that doesn't pay as much?). I think the Jordan vs Nike is six or a half dozen. Nike wants more exposure for the Jordan brand and may give an extra incentive in those contracts.

I read this about a month ago and it caught me off guard. The gist of the article was the compensation for Nike was larger than that for Jordan's brand. I want to say it was an article covering the new Michigan deal. I"ll see if I can find it.

One thing that was lincluded in their deal was an incentive package where they were paid more if they won the division title, conference title, and on down the line. I also noticed there was a clause in their contract which extended it if they were put on probation and lost post-season appearances.

 

[RTB X Bot]

 

[RTB X Bot]

 

[Michael Casagrande | mcasagrande@al.com]

The story behind Alabama's previously unreported contract extension with Nike.
Michael Casagrande | mcasagrande@al.com
Alabama quietly extended Nike deal that missed gold rush

 

[planomateo]

Interesting.

 

[OldPlayer]

Alabama is underpaid

 

[Elderfalsedemigod]

Amazing how much the dynamic changed in 5 years

 

[#80]

Alabama is underpaid

You think ?? I don't understand this at all. Sounds like we need to hire someone who knows how to negotiate.

 

[T&B]

There has got to be a way to rework this deal. Bama not even getting market value. My goodness what a botch.

SMH

 

[rammerjammer]

What is sad, is that Battle still says it was a good deal. Truly sad, considering he sold his licensing business for 100 million. He allowed Nike to break it off in us dry. Didn't even shop us around. Pathetic.

 

[planomateo]

Wimp this morning had an interesting perspective, what kind of contract do you get if Saban isn't the coach. Perhaps he was hedging against that at the time.

 

[T&B]

Was reading somewhere else that this deal will leave over 100 million on the table by 2025.

Think of all the facility upgrades you can do with 100 mil. Someone needs to be tar&feathered

 

[OldPlayer]

Without seeing the actual contract, we can't tell if it's a good deal or a suck deal. We sort of know about the payment, but what about the merchandise? Are other sports getting more?

 

[TerryP]

For perspective, these are the top contracts when this was signed. It's the database from 2013, December. Bama isn't listed, but isn't at the top of the list either.

https://www.bizjournals.com/portlan...2/database-nike-adidas-under-armour-ncaa.html