Word on the street is that we're becoming an Adidas team. While I don't care much from a football and other sports standpoint, I feel like this is a bigger issue for basketball. Thoughts?
Switching to Adidas...
- Thread starter ouchmyknee
- Start date
That's my understanding too. Supposedly, Nike once again low-balled us and Adidas was willing to come up with the money. I think right now we can get all of the financial contributions we can get. And who knows, maybe Adidas will pleasantly surprise us with decent looking uniforms with input from our coaches.
Kansas, Louisville, Indiana, Miami, Arizona St, Mississippi St, etc...no problems recruiting with Adidas. I know some of those schools recruit themselves, but we are not exactly peddling Starburys
LOL, as the parent of a 15 yo boy who was obsessed with Nike and now has added some Adidas, you are going to be disappointed.
Carino seems to think that it's a negative to switch to Adidas, when it comes to influence.
http://www.app.com/story/sports/col...ing-switch-adidas-not-ideal-rutgers/97549278/
http://www.app.com/story/sports/col...ing-switch-adidas-not-ideal-rutgers/97549278/
Why the hate for Carino? He is very plugged into the college/high school recruiting scene. He is also very fair when it comes to RU. Hobbs tried to go to UA first, but was turned away. In my opinion, this is in no way a good deal for RU. (I realize we had little other options) Nike was giving us $5.25mm for five years or $1.05mm a year. Adidas is giving us $10mm for six years or $1.66mm a year. Plus, Sarge told me via Twitter today that the new deal is equipment heavy and cash light. That means the cash we get from Adidas could be equal or less than what we get from Nike.
It is no secret that the local AAU programs in NJ/NY are tired into Nike and UA. Does that mean that we can't get any of their kids, of course not, but it does not make it any easier.
If Nike low-balled RU, fuhgeddaboutdem and once RU starts winning those who think RU needs Nike's support might be eating their words.
It's one thing to take less because it's a better deal, another thing to take less from someone who don't care if you do and possibly won't work as hard for your success as they would another school signed with them.
It's one thing to take less because it's a better deal, another thing to take less from someone who don't care if you do and possibly won't work as hard for your success as they would another school signed with them.
Aren't we now and have been for a while nike? Cause that has really been helping our bball recruiting.... can't give up that advantage we have had.
I read somewhere that our old deal with Nike was equipment heavy and cash light as well, $160K in cash. I would think we will be getting more cash from Adidas.
The total value of the deal goes from $1.1M to $1.7M, I can't see the equipment portion going up so much that we get less cash.
Because Nike didn't want us. Read the article. Plus, Adidas is willing to pay more cash.
It's a huge issue. Let me outline it for you
#1 AAU circuit is dominated by Nike and Under Armour now. You will NOT be able to get into certain AAU programs if you're not in the same outfitter.
#2 Adidas uniforms blow, look at Wisconsin's. How do you blow a red and white uniform? Easy why they switched to Under Armour.
#3 The only good programs using Adidas are Kansas & Louisville. That's it. Two programs who are well known for their own ability to cheat like hell in recruiting and don't need the AAU do get a top 10 class.
For football, there are more good football schools, but not much: Miami, Louisville, Kansas, Texas A&M, Miss State, Nebraska, Indiana, Arizona State, N.C. State.
So basically everyone has seen Adidas has been falling, and Under Armour and Nike have been gaining at their expense. Under Armour is gaining at Nike's expense slightly, but much more against Adidas.
I don't care either way with Rutgers. Part of me likes them joining the UA family, but the other part doesn't want you to do well because for Maryland to do well, we need Rutgers to lose to us, unless PSU or MSU takes your place and our place at the bottom.
Just trying to give the fair opinion here.
giving a fair opinion while you talk about underarmour as if their stocks arent plummeting while adidas probably saw the biggest rise this year amongst the 3, hiring 3 of nike's top guys
AAU basketball is a cesspool and Nike/UA are at the core of enabling this activity. Addidas is not exactly the ProKeds brand and it is global. Win and the kids will come. Not in the interest of Nike/UA to pay more $$ to RU. They have their favorites and prefer the area talent go to the established schools in their portfolio. Win and the kids will come.
GO RU
Your post is spot on just a tad off, it's $130K in cash, that was the whole enchilada. For others, sorry but bowing down to Nike for that deal again was ludicrous. We now have an onsite representative who will work directly with us on design and marketing. Nike just gave us what they wanted to. As far as basketball recruits, Nike hasn't really helped us in that department in recent history. So what wasn't lost, won't be missed.
Last edited:
Easy look at your abomination of a football uniform. Now talk about completely sucking. Who'd you commission for that design Jackson Pollock? Because they certainly look like somebody threw sh*t at a wall and said Wa La, Maryland's new uniforms.
Only thing worse than the Terp football unis are the all-yellow hoops unis....those seriously hurt the eyes, I find myself wanting to change the channel during the games in which they don those outfits so I don't have to keep looking at them. Melo Tremble is a helluva player, though....regardless of what he's wearing (unis or sneakers).
UA’s stock has been steadily in decline. Their shoes are horrible. I wouldn't be shocked to see them get out of the shoe biz all together at some point.
Hardy har har, we want them that way. You ever look at top merchandising teams? Maryland always in top 25.
Anyways, my point was more to the whole of Adidas' uniforms. Sure Maryland goes flashy and ugly to you, but Notre Dame, Auburn and Wisonsin are very similar to what you guys want. Clean crisp good looking uniforms.
Adidas is doing much better financially, but they still suck in terms of college outfitters. I mean if UA and Nike offer you less, and they are offering you more? it's because they have lost a lot of ground in the game and need to pick up some teams.
You need the money, more than apparently, you need the recruiting spike or swag with uniforms. Michigan & Wisconsin left Addidas for a good reason. Let go of your hate of Maryland, and take a look at the landscape.
The soccer and tennis teams will rejoice over this news. Possibly track and field. The rest will be bummed.
The recruits I talk with, for the most part, view adidas as something their grandfather wears. Most kids want Nike stuff followed closely by Under Armour.
Nike overpaid to get/keep schools like Texas, Tennessee and Michigan. So some of the non Nike Elite schools like Rutgers and Miami get lowballed or outbid by Adidas.
Apparently most recruits don't care that much about who outfits our teams:
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/threads/recruit-reaction-adidas.118886/
What do you expect them to say? No those are garbage? I don't want to play in those at Rutgers?
http://footballscoop.com/news/100-r...recruiting-process-and-the-style-they-prefer/
It's very important, to even think that it's not is stupid. Do you think that much money is being shelled out because it's not important?
Yes Maryland gets voted in the Best and Worst category. As far as I am concerned the worst thing about being talked about is not being talked about. I'm fine with 5 top recruits hating our uniform, if 5 top recruits love it and sign. 10 years ago, I don't think anyone would mention us on that list.
Good thing is the deal is short, and you can come to your senses. Ideally, in a few years Rutgers will be more valuable and can sign with Nike or UA.
And we wouldn't expect a UA butt boy to respond any different. Why don't you just go away and buy another 12K in UA stock. I heard that's doing quite well right now. They even had the CEO on CNBC to try and quell mass exodus.
Can anyone explain this to me. This gets said all the time but I find it hard to comprehend. Don't these programs want to put as many kids into high majors as possible? Are they really not going to let a school recruit the team because of shoe deal?
If a kid is choosing between Rutgers and another school, are they really going to tell him you should sign with the Nike school? Is he really going to listen?
I guess the question is if Nike has provided you donations, free uniforms, free shoes, donations for travel around the country and essentially keeps your lights on, gas in the truck/buses, money for the hotel rooms and you as the AAU director have a Top 300 player, are you really going to tell that player that it doesn't matter???
I think there is an assumption that these are two parent households for these players with annual income of 175K to 250K, half a million in their retirement accounts at age 45-50, another 150K in Money Market accounts and they take their kids to Disney, Cabo, the Bahamas every summer to unwind.....
Instead it may be 1/3rd of that household income, there is no residual income for the AAU coach or the players families, that aren't dropping $500 to $1K every month to help pay for hotels, travel to and from locations, getting exposure to tournaments in Las Vegas, Myrtle Beach, Atlanta and everywhere else in between.....
How do people believe this process happens??? if you have a talented 8th or 9th grader and an AAU coach tells you that your costs are going to be somewhat offset for travel, hotels, meals and other things and your son is going to get free gear, sneakers, shorts, tank tops, look good and be the big man on campus at their HS, who is turning down that exposure.....
The parents or guardians benefit from the free publicity, these kids are funneled into a FREE education of the school of their choice, once they graduate HS or prep school.....perhaps it's not valued as much as basketball, which may be another story, but some kids land at Yale/Princeton/Cornell and other places, where an endowment can offset a players cost for an Ivy or good education.
HS basketball is about 25/30% of the exposure involved with the majority of these kids at a national level.....the rest is showing coaches that you can compete against other elite or good players and the fair or unfair way is to have the player on the AAU circuit.
There is an implied assumption that if you are providing this exposure for not the Top 20 National recruit that can go anywhere he wants, but for the Top 200-500 player that fills 90% of the other rosters around the country at Power 5 schools, it matters....Nike and UA aren't donating free gear to see the players go elsewhere....neither is Adidas.....
Kids are pawns as free advertisers.....it's the simple way to explain it.....Nike doesn't need to run a commercial on ESPN, they need to create, donate and get kids at a young age to wear their stuff, so others around them will be influenced to then buy it....the AAU coaches benefit, the kids benefit, the parents cost are offset, the cycle continues....
Why it matters is the alignment provides a higher pool of players that you can at least have one less important obstacle to deal with.....it doesn't mean that everyone is going to pick a school because of it, but if all things are equal between School A and School B for a player, the school that gets the benefit of the doubt, may be aligned with that schools choice of apparel.
I know it's anecdotal, and maybe different demographics prefer different brands (and I'm certainly not privy to the thinking of top basketball recruits), but as a father of a 15 year old, who is paying for all the overpriced shoes, track pants, dri-fit shirts, etc., I can say with certainty that there has been a major shift to Adidas over the past couple of years. Not necessarily preferred, but on more equal footing. A couple of years back, the kids wouldn't be seen in Adidas, so something is different. UA barely registers, to be honest, except for football equipment.
Maybe the landscape is changing a bit, and all these dire predictions are overblown.
Maybe the landscape is changing a bit, and all these dire predictions are overblown.
No i don't think they care as much, but getting through to them via AAU coaches, handlers, etc will be a bigger struggle. Those guys will be in their ear about the Nike/UA schools
When is the last time we got a high level basketball recruit from one these AAU teams sponsored by Nike?
