Adidas Pays

  • @ICTJayhawk

    Louisville is consistently ranked as the most valuable program in Men’s basketball plus they also have other sports, particularly football, that do very well.

    KU has one of the top ranked valuable programs in men’s basketball but other than women’s volleyball and track and field, neither a big audience draw, there is not much more; football has been a drag, although there seems to be some light at the end of the tunnel…hopefully the tunnel does not collapse. 😃

    There are two dominant sports in college sports, men’s football and basketball; KU does very well in one and very poorly in the other. The Adidas deal with KU is based almost solely on the success of the basketball program, without it KU would have a contract with Anta Sports.

  • @JayHawkFanToo I’m not saying KU is worth more, less or the same as UL. I’m just posing the question in light of this and other similar deals (UCLA, Michigan, etc.) with Nike, Adidas, Under Armor and even Russell (GaTech) as to what value KU has or may have when the current contract expires (or possibly if the current contract was “renegotiated” at some point).

  • KU’s current deal with Adidas runs through 2019 so two more academic/athletic years on the current deal. At that point, I wouldn’t be surprised if KU jumps into the top ten.

    The current richest apparel deals are:

    1. UCLA (Under Armour), $18.67 mil/year

    2. Ohio St. (Nike), $16.8 mil/year

    3. Texas (Nike), $16.67 mil/year

    4. Louisville (Adidas), $16 mil/year

    5. Nebraska (Adidas), $11.6 mil/year

    6. Michigan (Jordan/Nike), $11.56 mil/year

    7. Wisconsin (Under Armour), $9.6 mil/year

    8. Notre Dame (Under Armour) $9 mil/year

    9. Miami (Adidas), $7.8 mil/year

    10. South Carolina (Under Armour), $7.15 mil/year

    Texas A&M is right behind SCar at $7.1 mil/year. KU’s current deal is 6 years for $26 mil. which averaged out to $4.33 mil/year. KU won’t get a Louisville type deal, but I could maybe see KU doubling their next deal which would put KU between $8-9 mil/year and put KU in the bottom half of the top 10.

  • Skip adidas … go Under Armour.

  • @HighEliteMajor Under Armour wouldn’t pay KU much attention. They’re going all in on UCLA in basketball and trying to establish a major west coast presence, KU would be an afterthought for Under Armour right now. It might be different after the next contract is up when KU is in the Big 10 (hopefully).

    Unless Nike matches what Adidas offers finacially (or very close at least), Adidas is probably going to be the best choice in 2019. If Nike comes within a million or so per year of Adidas, it’s time to go back to Nike and reap the recruiting benefits of getting the top EYBL players because Coach K will be gone soon and Calipari is already starting to slip a little in recruiting.

  • Without a strong football program, KU’s options are limited. Nike already has a big presence in the Mid West so I would not think KU is high in their list. Under Armour is East Coast based and trying to get a foothold in markets with a young urban presence (West Coast) and KU does not fit that demographic. Adidas is likely still the best option.

    Obviously, a strong football program would change the equation and I am sure the AD is aware of this and hence the big emphasis in upgrading the football program and facilities.

  • @ICTJayhawk

    As I said, the lack of a strong football program limits the options.

  • HighEliteMajor said:

    Skip adidas … go Under Armour.

    I think UCLA might be the last big college contract for UA. Their stock is tanking, they are in a 2 year sales decline, they are laying off 300 employees, and they are undertaking a major restructuring announced at the beginning of August. That seems likely to eat up any cash they otherwise might have available.

    Some analysts say that UA’s hopes for future growth lie in overseas markets. I would think that limits the value of investing in colleges here. Then again, I never would have thought any of these companies can make money on those deals–all are struggling, from what I hear.

  • @mayjay

    UA appeal has been to the younger, urban people where it is extremely popular but that is a demographic with reduced buying power. The older, more affluent crowd are the ones that have the money to pay for all that over hyped and overpriced apparel. I see a lot of younger kids here in suburbia wearing UA gear but the parents are still wearing Nike/Adidas.

  • @JayHawkFanToo You may be right, but I like UA better than adidas or Nike. Golf gear is better. I think kids like their football gear better too.

    @mayjay Interesting You bring up the stock. If anyone invests, UA stock took an interesting dip and presents a good buying opportunity if you believe in the brand. Some numbers are odd but I can’t see it stagnating this low. I took the leap on the stock a week ago. Nike dipped too. But UA is down nearly 30% in the last two months. If you think this is temporary, that’s free money. To get back to June levels, it’s a 40% increase. Even if it takes 3 years to get there, that’s great return.


  • @HighEliteMajor

    At that risk level, maybe consider cryptocurrencies that have been making lots of millionaires this year.

    Bitcoin and Ether have done very well.

  • Each company wants a regionalized draw.

    For Under Armour, it’s Maryland on the east coast, UCLA out west and Notre Dame and Wisconsin in the midwest. They also have South Carolina in the south.

    Nike is obviously still the biggest, with adidas trying to get a foothold. Unfortunately, because KU football is weak, they are not the preference here in the midwest. Obviously, basketball is strong, but basketball does not get the dedicated eyes that football does (too many different games on at any one time), so its not the advertising draw.

    That is the downside, but with football interest and participation declining, we could see that start to shift soon.

  • The solution here is obvious.

    Go to the largest Chinese shoe company and propose a package deal with San Antonio and KU to promote their apparel and shoes in USA and across Eurasia. Offer to take at least one or two Chinese amateurs basketball players a year instead of us carrying walk-ons. The Chinese shoe company also agrees to deliver any great Chinese players to KU and then San Antonio. We create a China-KU One-Belt, One Path Invitational tournament that plays games in China and in USA. The Spurs agree to play exhibition games across the path of the Russo-China-India One Belt, One Path Supercorridor. The teams travel town to town to town across Eurasia on the Bullet Trains. The Spurs and KU also agree to play exhibitions at all the major China Towns in North America–San Francisco, LA, Toronto, New York, etc. One of the Big Commercial tie in is using old Kelly AFB in San Antonio as the place where the Chinese Shoe Co stages its All-star Games for high school recruits and its also sponsors a new summer league independent of the AAU that plays games at all the major stop points along the Super Corridor from Ixtapa to Kansas City. Tying Eurasia and North America into a single sports apparel market would within a year bring Nike, UA and adidas to their knees. KU and San Antonio would become the most globally famous and valuable brands on the planet.


  • @jaybate-1-0 Quick search … “Li-Ning’s major shoe lines include the “Flying Armor” series of basketball shoes”.

    So we equip the Jayhawks in Li-Ning Flying Armor shoes. Not totally sure about that … but I can be bought.

  • @HighEliteMajor

    Would KU signing a shoe contract paying $5 Billion/year in gold bullion be enough?

  • @HighEliteMajor

    Li Ning is endorsed by Dwyane Wade and also by Evan Turner and Dorrel Wright. Anta Sports, the outfit I mentioned on my original post (2nd from the top) had Keving Garnett and Klay Thompson wearing its shoes.Peak Sports has Tony Parker and George Hill, who both have signature shoes; Carl Landry is also signed with Peak.

    The Chinese shoe-cos are already here and it is a matter of time before they become big players. Like most Chinese products, the quality is inferior but you can always buy 3 or 4 for the price of a brand name item.

    I buy a lot of electronics from China and a local product that would cost me $100, I can buy the same generic Chinese product for $15 including expedited shipping from China; a no brainer really.

    I had to buy a sensor for the significant other’s Mercedes Benz and I called one of the on-line auto part retailers. He asked, do you want the brand name part or the generic version? I asked what is the difference? He said they are the same product made in the same factory in China, one is labeled with a brand name the other is not, the brand name is $150 the generics is $29…guess which one I got…

    By now, most of the brand name shoes are probably made in China and it is just a matter of time before we are given the same choice, brand name or the same shoe with a generic/Chinese brand for a fourth of the cost.

    It is impossible to compete with China in manufacturing even when American workers are twice as productive but Chinese workers hourly rates are one tenth of its American counterparts, work 12 hour days and do not have unions or labor issues.

  • Can Silvio come back? Look how ESPN spins the Adidas signing by putting a player Adidas paid on the cover pic. Fair and unbiased reporting 😉 😉 😈 (should be blue)


Log in to reply