Adidas vs UA

[jchem1995]

2 hours ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Give me Champion clothing all day long. It’s cheap, sold at every Walmart, and survives no more than three washings and still looks good...

Bought Champion in white. Got it in green too.

Edited October 7, 2019 by jchem1995

[FazaUSF]

4 hours ago, Triple B said:

How does our contract compare with other G5 programs? You can piss and moan all you want about utter failures and subsequent regression of the Athletics department but the last UA contract was signed when we were a BCS school. What matters is how our contract compares to our peers before claiming it's something the forum shouldn't be happy about .... and maybe it does suck in comparison but you can't compare it to something we had at a higher level so some relevant data could help stoke those flames of forum unhappiness.

All it takes is some Googling. Here is the link for our contract, raking in $150K/year: https://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bulls/2017/12/06/usf-strikes-apparel-deal-with-adidas/

Power 5 schools pull in anywhere from $2mil-7mil per year. We used to get a bit less than $2mil/yr from UA. That's a pretty significant drop to current. Clearly indicative of regression. Clearly something to be unhappy about on behalf of the school we love. 

[Triple B]

9 hours ago, JTrue said:

Boise - 6 yrs. $12.16 million Nike

That's the extent of my research.

That's total product and cash. Our total is 8 yrs. $26.3 million

[Triple B]

4 hours ago, FazaUSF said:

All it takes is some Googling. Here is the link for our contract, raking in $150K/year: https://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bulls/2017/12/06/usf-strikes-apparel-deal-with-adidas/

Power 5 schools pull in anywhere from $2mil-7mil per year. We used to get a bit less than $2mil/yr from UA. That's a pretty significant drop to current. Clearly indicative of regression. Clearly something to be unhappy about on behalf of the school we love. 

I saw the contract and am still wondering why you're still comparing it to our previous UA deal and current P5 deals. I don't need an apparel contract to be indicative of regression in the last decade. All I need is to compare our football schedule now and 10 years ago ........ right, Puc?

[CousinRicky]

19 hours ago, FazaUSF said:

All it takes is some Googling. Here is the link for our contract, raking in $150K/year: https://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bulls/2017/12/06/usf-strikes-apparel-deal-with-adidas/

Power 5 schools pull in anywhere from $2mil-7mil per year. We used to get a bit less than $2mil/yr from UA. That's a pretty significant drop to current. Clearly indicative of regression. Clearly something to be unhappy about on behalf of the school we love. 

But that was just them playing craps and throwing snake eyes.  Made a gamble on us and lost. 

[FazaUSF]

20 hours ago, Triple B said:

I saw the contract and am still wondering why you're still comparing it to our previous UA deal and current P5 deals. I don't need an apparel contract to be indicative of regression in the last decade. All I need is to compare our football schedule now and 10 years ago ........ right, Puc?

I noted that I dislike Adidas both for its style (or lack thereof) and the fact that it represents regression with respect to the stature and standing of USF Athletics. 

I was not attempting to utilize the contracts to point out regression to you, rather, I explained that to someone else who may not have been up to speed, particularly with respect to viewing supplier contracts as it relates to school stature and success. It was a relevant viewpoint to the thread and not aforementioned within the thread.

I do not compare it to current G5 schools because that would simply pile on evidence of regression, which is plainly obvious enough simply comparing our prior contract with our current one. And as you have already offered, you personally do not need to look beyond the schedule to notice regression. Comparing our contract to the rest of the G5 would be a different bone to pick than with our own Athletics department's failure to capitalize on early success and improve its national standing. 

[Triple B]

1 hour ago, FazaUSF said:

I noted that I dislike Adidas both for its style (or lack thereof) and the fact that it represents regression with respect to the stature and standing of USF Athletics.

So we're talking about fashion and symbolism ...... I can appreciate your stance from that standpoint.

[Bull Matrix]

I’m just happy U/

[DELdaBull]

Adidas style is lacking for sure. As a company that used to dominate the 80s and early 90s as far a fashion they are starting to make a comeback.  They for sure aren't using USF to brand that comeback. 

[CousinRicky]

4 hours ago, DELdaBull said:

Adidas style is lacking for sure. As a company that used to dominate the 80s and early 90s as far a fashion they are starting to make a comeback.  They for sure aren't using USF to brand that comeback. 

Smart people. Look what happened to UA when they did.