Goodbye Nike - hello adidas.

Michigan athletic director Bill Martin announced a surprising parting of the ways with the former and new collaboration with the latter on July 10, an agreement in which adidas will supply footwear and apparel for all 25 of the university's athletic teams.

The new agreement begins with the 2008-09 academic year and extends through the 2016-17 season. The agreement is valued at $7.5 million annually in cash and merchandise over the eight-year period.

"We are excited and proud of our new collaboration with adidas," Martin said in a statement. "adidas will outfit our student-athletes and teams from head to toe, while providing additional resources for our athletic department. The quality of adidas' product and their dedication to service, on-site and to all of our teams, makes adidas a terrific partner for us."

U-M teams will start wearing adidas footwear, uniforms, training apparel and accessories exclusively in 2008, joining Notre Dame, UCLA, Tennessee, Indiana, Nebraska and Wisconsin, among others in partnering with the sporting goods giant.

"The partnership between adidas and Michigan brings together two powerful brands that both stand for performance and excellence," Martyn Brewer, Head of US Sports Marketing for adidas, told MgoBlue.com. "Michigan is a marquis program and we are honored to add a university so rich in tradition to the adidas family of schools."

Added U-M athletics Chief Financial Officer Jason Winters: "We believe the new partnership is one of the strongest in college sports. Funding from the new agreement will provide added resources to our long term facility renewal plan."

This is absolutely terrible news. I am a huge Nike supporter and they clearly make the best of the best from their shoes, shirts, hats and their innovative technology such as Dri-fit, tighter fitting uniforms, and their new iPod technology. To me, adidas' gear looks cheaper an nowhere near as good looking as Nike's. I told Tre last night, I'd much rather us lose McGuffie than sign a deal with adidas. I can't buy any new Michigan gear until 2017. YUCK! [smilie=rant.gif]

Like I said in the Crisler thread they gave up the legacy of Fab Five and black Nike's, which is shit, now Michigan's percentage of white recruits will go up. Maybe they should have signed a deal with Jordan, then maybe they will get some talent.

Umm no about Nike. If you have a slender foot of a girl than I guess you might be right, but for guys like me with wide feet, well Nike sucks.

Also I hate the piping that has come on the UM uniforms because of Nike.

To be honest the only thing that makes me happy is the extra money. I guess I am a whore for thinking like that, but I dont really buy anything because it is made by someone in particular. if I like it, I buy it no matter who makes it.

If we really want to say who I wanted to get the contract, it would have been Under Armor. Much better than Nike anyways.

But again, I buy stuff for the block M not the swoosh. Nike and now Adias support UM, not UM supports Nike.

I had no idea people cared about this stuff.

No offense to anyone here, but if somebody doesn't like Nike and their gear, then it says something about your personal style. I'm not trying to go fashion here because we are a bunch of dudes, BUT there is a BIG difference between Nike uniforms, gear, etc. and everything else out there. There is a reason why the ballers have been rocking Jordan's since the mid 80's and there is a reason why the "Fab" Five started an athletic fashion revolution based on Nike gear- It's hands down the best. I always laugh when I open up Eastbay and there is the 5 page Nike spread and then the 1 inch addidas section with the sorry ass Wisconsin Uni's.

Now maybe you're one of these guys that could give a shit and wears the obnoxious Michigan hat with the Meijer maize and blue T because it's got your damn team on it and you could give a shit about name brands-fine. But, I'm telling you right now, it matters to recruits. You don't think the Carolina blue Nike/Jordan uniforms appeal to recruits? Switch em up to Addidas and see how sales plummet.

Maybe you're one of the good ole boys that doesn't give a shit about what teams wear, understandable. But to the rest of us that like rocking tight team gear and to the recruits that want to do the same, this a huge deal.

HORRIBLE DECISION.

For those that say, look at how much more money they received-wait and see how Michigan apparal plummets in sales now. There won't be as much around because addidas doesn't make much team gear and the ballers won't be buying any of it anymore because they buy it for the look, not the team. In the long run, they'll lose money. 2017 LOL

So are you saying that a prospective recruit that is down to two schools will choose the one that is Nike over the one that is adidas for that reason alone?

You like Nike shoes if you have slender feet like a girl.

Sorry, but I dont really care about style. I am married and I dont have to impress anyone working in my dungeon.

When I go out it usually to coach my kids soccer or baseball team (soon to be football) and I wear T-shirts and shorts and I dont care if they cost 5 dollars or 40 dollars, because dressing nice does not help my players nor me.

Funny how you say we are a bunch of dudes and say fashion in the same paragraph.....some of use are dudes...I worry about some of us who worry about fashion..:)

ND, UCLA TENN, along with Indiana and Wisconsin all wear Adidias.

I do not see ND or TENN getting football recruits, nor do I see Indiana or UCLA struggling on the hardwood getting basketball recruits.

Maybe in the slimey world of AAU and college basketball recruiting circles shoes matter, but I am more of a football fan myself and it will have very little impact on UM Football.

BTW if any of this money gets better facilities for UM B-Ball, I think that will weigh more heavily with a recruit than what shoe they wear.

Yeah the ballers were rocking with Nike back in the 80s because of Jordan, not because of the shoe itself. If Jordan would have been wearing Pumas, PUMA would be king right now.

Anyways, I am old and dont care. I buy what I like and not what the mass of stupid people buy. Like people buying something because Paris or Lohan has something, big fucking whoop. I could give 2 shits.

If you can't sell a kid on wearing all.day.i.dream.about.sex. then there is no hope for you.

But seriously, if a kid is going to make a decision on where to play based on which apparel company the school is in bed with, fuck 'em. Those aren't the kids you want anyways, IMO.

No offense to anyone here, but if somebody doesn't like Nike and their gear, then it says something about your personal style. I'm not trying to go fashion here because we are a bunch of dudes, BUT there is a BIG difference between Nike uniforms, gear, etc. and everything else out there. There is a reason why the ballers have been rocking Jordan's since the mid 80's and there is a reason why the "Fab" Five started an athletic fashion revolution based on Nike gear- It's hands down the best. I always laugh when I open up Eastbay and there is the 5 page Nike spread and then the 1 inch addidas section with the sorry ass Wisconsin Uni's.

Now maybe you're one of these guys that could give a shit and wears the obnoxious Michigan hat with the Meijer maize and blue T because it's got your damn team on it and you could give a shit about name brands-fine. But, I'm telling you right now, it matters to recruits. You don't think the Carolina blue Nike/Jordan uniforms appeal to recruits? Switch em up to Addidas and see how sales plummet.

Maybe you're one of the good ole boys that doesn't give a shit about what teams wear, understandable. But to the rest of us that like rocking tight team gear and to the recruits that want to do the same, this a huge deal.

HORRIBLE DECISION.

For those that say, look at how much more money they received-wait and see how Michigan apparal plummets in sales now. There won't be as much around because addidas doesn't make much team gear and the ballers won't be buying any of it anymore because they buy it for the look, not the team. In the long run, they'll lose money. 2017 LOL

Damn, all Michigan has to do is read this board and get ALL the answers.
Did Nike write "The Victors"? Did they invent "The Helmet"?
Geezus, your animosity is so high you write a half page post on something like this as a thinly veiled attempt to spew more garbage and rhetoric.
If someone is dopey enough to spend sixty bucks to wear some team jersey, they're probably dopey enough not to notice that the insignia has changed.

The fact is that Nike and Jordan have, and always will be the icon of basketball. No matter how much you don't care that is what I and kids want to rock.

does it really matter that much to a prospect? i mean, the NBA uses Adidas:

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/41CD0170HTL._AA231_.jpg

http://g-ec2.images-amazon.com/images/I/511J2ZB1WHL._AA231_.jpg

Ahhh, Tre's posts make more sense now that I realize that MSU is no longer wearing that crappy Reebok stuff.

Forget about Izzo and Dantonio getting all this credit, it's all about the swoosh!

Oh yeah good point matt. Adidias is the offical sponsor of the NBA. So does it matter if they do it in college or the pros, but they all wear Adidias at some point.

Doesn't Adidas sponsor Notre Dame?

Yeah ND, TENN, UCLA, WIS, IN to name a few.

i purposefully buy clothes w/o the logo. what nonsense. shallowness to the extreme. who wears a hat w/ just a nike swish on it? my favorite are the "abercrombie" t-shirts. "do i get your approval now that i spent 20 dollars on a t-shirt?". c'mon.

michigan was around long before nike and did fine. i think its a safe bet theyll continue to do fine without nike.

Dr Tre takes it on the chin in this one. So does bball.http://www.irememberjfk.com/mt/graphics/robots.jpg

So are you saying that a prospective recruit that is down to two schools will choose the one that is Nike over the one that is adidas for that reason alone?

No, I'm saying that the Nike brand and the uniforms and apparal add to the appeal of a school. If you deny that, you are not in touch with kids today.

For instance, let's take a Nike school like Oregon for example. Which is more tied to Nike than any other school. And compare them with Wisconsin which is an addidas school. Ask an kid which would be the cooler school to go to, to play football or basketball. See what answer you get.

Yeah the ballers were rocking with Nike back in the 80s because of Jordan, not because of the shoe itself. If Jordan would have been wearing Pumas, PUMA would be king right now.
Sorry dude, but you are dead wrong. I've got 4th graders in class that walk into school saying, "Dude, check out my new Jordans." They weren't even alive when Jordan played!

Shaq could be the most dominant big man alive, you see anybody rocking the new "Shaq Attacks?" I'm sorry dude, it's fine that you don't care about this stuff. I have no problem with it. But the fact that you could give a shit makes it impossible for you to understand.

The fact is that Nike and Jordan have, and always will be the icon of basketball. No matter how much you don't care that is what I and kids want to rock.

EXACTLY! You can't explain shit like this to Art or Zip because they are Dad guys that aren't exactly in touch with ballers, high schoolers, or even younger people and what they want to rock.

I'm sorry but the Soccer Dad look isn't appealing to younger people. I'm not shallow, I don't buy things because of the logo. I buy it because that perticular brand makes things that look good. I like Nike stuff because it looks good, not because it cost 60 bucks and not because of the swoosh.

Bball and I are taking it on the chin? I don't think so, only Dad guys are in disagreement.

No, I'm saying that the Nike brand and the uniforms and apparal add to the appeal of a school. If you deny that, you are not in touch with kids today.

For instance, let's take a Nike school like Oregon for example. Which is more tied to Nike than any other school. And compare them with Wisconsin which is an addidas school. Ask an kid which would be the cooler school to go to, to play football or basketball. See what answer you get.

Fuck YES! Those Oregon uniforms are da BOMB! And, who the hell wouldn;t want to be known as a "Duck"?
Whats their fight song? Neil Diamond's "Jonathan Livingston Seagull"?
Anne Murray's "Snowbird"?
What do they all do on Friday before a game, set up a giant game of "Duck Duck GOOSE?"
Stop it Zip, you're killing me!

Fuck YES! Those Oregon uniforms are da BOMB! And, who the hell wouldn;t want to be known as a "Duck"?
Whats their fight song? Neil Diamond's "Jonathan Livingston Seagull"?
Anne Murray's "Snowbird"?
What do they all do on Friday before a game, set up a giant game of "Duck Duck GOOSE?"
Stop it Zip, you're killing me!

Like I said, you wouldn't understand. And chances are, you'd have a hard time connecting to a high schooler.

Before prospects even step on the court before tournaments they are wearing Jordans before games. People, except older dads (who want da same pussy), wear Jordan Dub Zeros and Retro Jordans.

Stephon Marbury and Ben Wallace are weeping while they read this thread.

http://www.starbury.com/
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/17962620/

but seriously, i still don't understand the argument here. are we saying that a high school recruit is going to pass over UMich (or any other school) because they aren't Nike sponsored? I understand 100% that high schoolers are young and want to wear the coolest stuff like Jordans. but we're talking about the uniform will have a TINY Adidas logo instead of a Nike swoosh...

Geez, it's not like friggin' KMart is making Umich uniforms....

Like I said, you wouldn't understand. And chances are, you'd have a hard time connecting to a high schooler.

You should be on the debate team:
"Listen, I'm right, and that's just it. You wouldn;t understand, so I'm not even going to debate it"

http://www.coolhunting.com/giftguide/images/rockem.jpg

You should be on the debate team:
"Listen, I'm right, and that's just it. You wouldn;t understand, so I'm not even going to debate it"


I'm sorry but arguing with you and Art on this is like arguing with my Dad back in the day on what is "cool" to wear. Yet, even he understood that I had to have the new Jordan's for my season.

but seriously, i still don't understand the argument here. are we saying that a high school recruit is going to pass over UMich (or any other school) because they aren't Nike sponsored? I understand 100% that high schoolers are young and want to wear the coolest stuff like Jordans. but we're talking about the uniform will have a TINY Adidas logo instead of a Nike swoosh...

Geez, it's not like friggin' KMart is making Umich uniforms....

It's actually being made into a bigger deal than it is due to some of the senior citizen lame point of views here. Is it a HUGE deal with recruiting? No. Does it have a little impact, probably. It's undeniable that having great looking stuff appeals to kids. And it just sucks for the under 35 UM fans out there like Moodini and it'll probably hurt UM pretty bad when it comes to sales. That's all.

http://www.mden.com/shopping/store/vendor8/fullscale/auth7white.jpghttp://www.wisconsinmade.com/wiscmade/images/products/2933M.jpg
If you can't see a difference, I can't help ya. Both pics are the authentic versions that are worn by the players. One is classy, sharp, embroidered, and great looking. The other cheap looking, screen printed, and lame. Big deal? I'd be pissed if I was a UM fan. That's all I'm saying.

I'd be more pissed if I was an MSU fan. Their uniforms are green.
Elfs wear green.

I'm sorry but arguing with you and Art on this is like arguing with my Dad back in the day on what is "cool" to wear. Yet, even he understood that I had to have the new Jordan's for my season.

I can see your point. Sitting around jerking off to pictures of Tom Izzo sure does require the best footwear.

I'd be more pissed if I was an MSU fan. Their uniforms are green.
Elfs wear green.

Maybe, but we've got the tightest freaking mascot on Earth and that is a Moodini quote after watching 300.

Trust me dude, those dark days wearing Reebok sucked as a MSU fan. They won the National Championship and Reebok put out one freaking NC shirt. Their Uni's were terrible, luckily their teams were great.
Before Nike:
http://www.chuckthomas.com/rrock/rrms33je.jpg
After Nike:
http://blog.mlive.com/spartansinsider/large_Thornhill.JPG

So 4th graders wanting to wear Jordans makes Michigan worse on the field/court.

Gotcha.

They have a pretty good business school at UM, right?

Do you think that someone there was bright enough to figure out that the increased $ that they are getting from adidas is more than enough to cover any possible dropoff in sales/proceeds if in fact there is one?

I'm not trying to bust your balls here too much Tre, it just sounds like you are trying to be opportunistic here.

It is a big deal because of something I said?

I am not the one freaking out over this whole thing. Adidias, Nike, nonissue to me. The only issue is more money for UM.

Sorry that you have to pawn off the fact that you are so shallow that a swoosh matters to you more than anything else.

I connect with 3rd and 4th graders just fine. I coach them in multiple sports all summer. When I got their uniforms for the baseball and soccer all star teams, not one of them came up to me and got pissed because there was no Nike Swoosh on their uniforms. Hell, most of them were just happy to have a uniform.

I am not too old to understand the concept that the Nike Swoosh is beloved by many. It is not even the product, but the fact that it has been beat over on heads on TV so much that we should just do it.

Again, only those who are somehow upset that UM and Nike are not involved have their panties in a bunch. I dont really care who they get to make their uniforms or shoes.

what a stupid argument

adidas will be fine. They don't have the "Tre Playa" aspect going for them, but usually the gear is quality.

thispostwasanexcusetogetmynewmoodiniavatarandsigou tthere

I connect with third and fourth graders. A backhand smash to the face works quite well to get them to wear the new Adidas UM jersey.

Maybe, but we've got the tightest freaking mascot on Earth and that is a Moodini quote after watching 300.

Trust me dude, those dark days wearing Reebok sucked as a MSU fan. They won the National Championship and Reebok put out one freaking NC shirt. Their Uni's were terrible, luckily their teams were great.
Before Nike:
http://www.chuckthomas.com/rrock/rrms33je.jpg
After Nike:
http://blog.mlive.com/spartansinsider/large_Thornhill.JPG

MSU DOES have a sweet mascot, but I didn't picture him fighting the Persians in "300".

I think your uniform comparison is a bit skewed, Tre. One set is pictured on a close hanger outside what appears to a dumpster not unlike the one I currently reside in. The other set is being worn by Drew Stanton and I belive Jehru Caulcrick in what must be Spartan Stadium. I bet if you put the first two on a couple of otherwise naked MSU HOT chicks, the Reebok uni's would win.
We'll see this fall. If UM's uniforms look like dooky, and sales plummet from what I believe is currently the #4 position, I will then concede that you have won the argument, and you and Moodini can tell your teacher about that.

So 4th graders wanting to wear Jordans makes Michigan worse on the field/court.

Gotcha.


Glenn, you are seriously a moron. Yeah, that's what I said. That's exactly the point I was making. You either can't read or you're an idiot.

It is a big deal because of something I said?

I am not the one freaking out over this whole thing. Adidias, Nike, nonissue to me. The only issue is more money for UM.

Sorry that you have to pawn off the fact that you are so shallow that a swoosh matters to you more than anything else.

I connect with 3rd and 4th graders just fine. I coach them in multiple sports all summer. When I got their uniforms for the baseball and soccer all star teams, not one of them came up to me and got pissed because there was no Nike Swoosh on their uniforms. Hell, most of them were just happy to have a uniform.

I am not too old to understand the concept that the Nike Swoosh is beloved by many. It is not even the product, but the fact that it has been beat over on heads on TV so much that we should just do it.

Again, only those who are somehow upset that UM and Nike are not involved have their panties in a bunch. I dont really care who they get to make their uniforms or shoes.

That's 100% alpaca right there. [smilie=alpaca.gif]

Glenn, you are seriously a moron. Yeah, that's what I said. That's exactly the point I was making. You either can't read or you're an idiot.


lol

I think you are hungry for an opportunity to feel like MSU is better than Michigan, just once. For some reason, you thought that this story was that golden opportunity.

The junk you spewed in this thread is so baseless with regards to how this decision is going to effect (or not effect) Michigan's on-field success, that now, left without any solid points to make, you are resorting to calling others (me, in this case) morons.

People don't have to look any farther than this thread to see who the moron is.

Weaksauce, my man, weaksauce.

Sorry that you have to pawn off the fact that you are so shallow that a swoosh matters to you more than anything else.


Look at that, you and Glenn have something in common. What is with you two? "The swoosh matters to you more than anything else." Yeah, that's what I said. The swoosh matters more than anything in life, that's exactly what I was trying to say. I know I said that Nike just makes better gear, but what I really meant by that was that "The swooth matter more than anything else."

Do you know how stupid you sound? You sound like Glenn with his brilliant post above.

I liked your other moronic post- "Only slender footed girls like Nike's." Brilliant. Michael Jordan, Lebron James, Tiger Woods, Derek Jeter, etc etc. are all a bunch of slender footed girls. Maybe it is in fact your shitty posts that have dragged this on.

Wearing Nike might get your jersey included in more rap videos, but games aren't won in rap videos.

I'll repeat the concept for you Tre, since you seem to be having a hard time.

Any kid that chooses a school based on which apparel company they have contracted with as opposed to basing it on the strength of the program, the coaching staff, facilities, academics, TV exposure, and potential playing time, for example, is not the kind of kid Michigan wants anyways.

You can have those kids, Tre. Get them some new Jordans and a fresh new swooshed MSU jersey so they can be happy with 9th place in the Big Ten. But hey, they'll be "feeeeelin it" because they look good!

You not being able to admit that adidas vs. Nike has NOTHING to do with Michigan's on-field success is the real story here.

Note: Look for Lebron James playing a tender footed girl in the next "Lebron's" commercial.

I hear Serina whoops his ass in that ad.

lol

I think you are hungry for an opportunity to feel like MSU is better than Michigan, just once. For some reason, you thought that this story was that golden opportunity.

The junk you spewed in this thread is so baseless with regards to how this decision is going to effect (or not effect) Michigan's on-field success that left without any solid points to make, you are resorting to calling others (me, in this case) morons.

People don't have to look any farther than this thread to see who the moron is.

Weaksauce, my man, weaksauce.

A MICHIGAN FAN starts this thread. I agree with him. And somehow Glenn turns it into some conspiracy theory that Tre wants to twist this into MSU is better than UM. Are you that obsessed with the MSU-UM fan war?

The only thing people are going to see is your over the top posts and the fact that you can't read. Moodini came over and checked this thread out last night, first thing he said, "Of course, Glenn going way over the top with his post." I make points about how this sucks and Nike is the way to go and you turn it into some ridiculous theory about MSU. Maybe moron was the wrong word. Pathetic?

But, I'm telling you right now, it matters to recruits.

Wearing Nike might get your jersey included in more rap videos, but games aren't won in rap videos.

I'll repeat the concept for you Tre, since you seem to be having a hard time.

Any kid that chooses a school based on which apparel company they have contracted with as opposed to basing it on the strength of the program, the coaching staff, facilities, academics, TV exposure, and potential playing time, for example, is not the kind of kid Michigan wants anyways.

You can have those kids, Tre. Get them some new Jordans and a fresh new swooshed MSU jersey so they can be happy with 9th place in the Big Ten. But hey, they'll be "feeeeelin it" because they look good!

You not being able to admit that adidas vs. Nike has NOTHING to do with Michigan's on-field success is the real story here.

I've said it the entire time. Huge deal? (make sure you read it this time) NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Does it have anything to do with on field success? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Moodini starts a simple little thread about how it sucks that UM switched from Nike, I agreed completely. You start going off on some rant about MSU and what kind of kids you want. The only thing I said in terms of recruits is that Nike is more appealing to them. Does it matter to them, sure, it appeals to them and they are high schoolers. Did I say a kid wouldn't go there because of it? Did anyone say they'd have some monumental dropoff in recruiting all because they don't have Nike? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe if I use enough exclamation points, you'll read it this time. We just said it appealed to kids therefore it's good to have Nike. Mountains out of molehills dude.

Carry on with your conspiracty theory about how this somehow involves Tre and his quest to take down Michigan and raise up the green and white. Good grief.

I told Tre last night, I'd much rather us lose McGuffie than sign a deal with adidas. I can't buy any new Michigan gear until 2017. YUCK! [smilie=rant.gif]

I'm going to leave the fact that you guys talk about this place with each other in person alone. I don't have a problem with Mood at all, but when you post something like the quote above, you give the appearance that you are a fan of clothing, not a fan of a sports team.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, lol.

I've said it the entire time. Huge deal? (make sure you read it this time) NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


But to the rest of us that like rocking tight team gear and to the recruits that want to do the same, this a huge deal.

HORRIBLE DECISION.


Hmmm.


Does it have anything to do with on field success? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


But, I'm telling you right now, it matters to recruits.

Hmmm.

So now you are saying that it matters to recruits (implying that it will impact their decision where to go) but not the on-field product.

How can both be true?

You are approaching defcon 4, I think my work here is done.

LMAO at Glenn.


We have a winner...applications for the Special Olympics are 2 forums over.

what's wrong with seeing a guy that you normally hang out with and bringing up wtf?

Here is where I think Tre was going with this whole recruit angle.....as a young kid your ideas of what team or school is cool can be easily swayed, a young kid may be at Champs thinking to himself "I don't care what team I rock but I want it to be Nike" (this is just a young kid that has not figured out yet that this stuff does not matter)....Then that kid goes on buying and starting to feel that certain team, and as he grows up, he becomes a fan.

I'll admit that it is weak, but the possibility is there.

Aaaaah, Glenn. The whole grabbing quotes out of context and piecing them together to win an argument. Gotta love it. Let me explain it to you since you apparantly are a little challenged.


Originally Posted by DrTre11
I've said it the entire time. Huge deal? (make sure you read it this time) NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by DrTre11
But to the rest of us that like rocking tight team gear and to the recruits that want to do the same, this a huge deal.

HORRIBLE DECISION.

In the first post, I was responding to your question as to whether or not this is a big deal in terms of affecting on the field performance, obviously it's not. In the second post I was referring to this being a big deal for fans like Moodini and I that buy a lot of fan gear and we want to wear tight stuff. Two completely different contexts, next time I won't use the same exact adjective in both since you like to play little games with taking things out of context. I could do the same. Next...


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTre11
Does it have anything to do with on field success? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTre11
But, I'm telling you right now, it matters to recruits.

First post, is Michigan going to be bad now because they don't have Nike? No. Second post, Do young high school kids care what your stuff looks like and do certain looks appeal to them? yes.


Wizzle understood what I'm saying. Moodini understood what I'm saying. Bball11 understood what I'm saying. But, Glenn doesn't. Hmmmm.

Another cool aspect of the new agreement.


The university said the contract also includes provisions to protect labor and human rights at factories. Nike has drawn criticisms over conditions at its overseas factories, and student groups at Michigan have long criticized the school for its relationship with the company.

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/sports-24/118410957221890.xml&storylist=newsmichigan

*Insert Spartan reply that human rights aren't as important as sweet-ass-looking jerseys*

I honestly can't believe this thread. I'll go as far to say that I personally, liked our Nike jerseys. Do I think because we have Adidas now that our jersey will be lame, or have ANY impact on recruits at all? Not a chance in hell. People go to Michigan because it's Michigan, not because we rock tight Nike swooshes. Mood's line of rather having Nike than Adidas and losing McGuffie is the crap statment that myself, Tre, Wizzle, Filly, Jethro, and all the Saginaw boys have been putting up with for 10 years. He is the ultimate shock talk master, and that's all that was, shock talk. I guarantee he would rather have Whitey McWhiterson throwing Reggie Bush jukes wearing a UM ADIDAS jersey, than not. That is all...

My brain must be fried out from filling out forms all day long cuz picturing an announcer calling McGuffie "Whitey McWhiterson" has me rolling right now

I honestly can't believe this thread. I'll go as far to say that I personally, liked our Nike jerseys. Do I think because we have Adidas now that our jersey will be lame, or have ANY impact on recruits at all? Not a chance in hell. People go to Michigan because it's Michigan, not because we rock tight Nike swooshes. Mood's line of rather having Nike than Adidas and losing McGuffie is the crap statment that myself, Tre, Wizzle, Filly, Jethro, and all the Saginaw boys have been putting up with for 10 years. He is the ultimate shock talk master, and that's all that was, shock talk. I guarantee he would rather have Whitey McWhiterson throwing Reggie Bush jukes wearing a UM ADIDAS jersey, than not. That is all...

I don't know dude. I know what you're talking about with the Moodini hot and cold statements, but he was here when he found out the Nike news and he was crushed. I think he was serious about that. I kind of understand it because I'm the same in wanting my school to look the best in every way possible, but McGuffie is pretty freaking tight. Tough call.

White kids love Jordans because it's the closest they can get to feeling good about their athleticism. Go ahead and talk about your middle class suberb kids, I teach someplace that actually matters in recruiting. Nike isn't as strong as you would think. Yeah, you see it a bunch, but to talk to the kids they don't really care. It's all about the money. You ask them which shoes they favor and they'll tell you any shoe that gives them an endorsement deal is fine.

White kids love Jordans because it's the closest they can get to feeling good about their athleticism. Go ahead and talk about your middle class suberb kids, I teach someplace that actually matters in recruiting. Nike isn't as strong as you would think. Yeah, you see it a bunch, but to talk to the kids they don't really care. It's all about the money. You ask them which shoes they favor and they'll tell you any shoe that gives them an endorsement deal is fine.

"Go ahead and talk about your middle class suberb kids, I teach someplace that actually matters in recruiting." Oh pardon me Michelle! http://mindwingconcepts.com/images/Dangerous_Minds.jpg Why didn't I think of that! Michethro would have been asking AH kids daily which shoes they feel while student teaching! I'm willing to bet that question wasn't asked once and I'm also willing to bet that Jordans and Nike Air Force Ones were the number 1 most popular shoe worn into your classroom daily.

BTW, we're not talking endorsements, of course they'd take the millions. We're talking school appeal and the company that brings the most to the table in that respect.

Of course I didn't ask kids which shoes they would choose from a school. I simply looked at their freaking feet. Of all the Jordans I saw, most were being worn by white kids and kids that couldn't ball. Sure, some of the actual athletes had Jordans or Nikes, but not exclusively. Nobody seemed to give a crap. The certainly feel Adidas and Reebok (who is owned by Adidas) enough to go to their camps, don't they?
Go ahead and play your street cred card all you want, it will ri=un with the party school card State plays. Wouldn't they rather go to a party with hot chicks than hang out on campus with burly lesbians and foreign genius kids? In spite of that, kids have still gone to Michigan in the past. This is a non-factor from the angle you're using.

Remind me to find a picture of Kindergarten Cop for my next post.

By the way, also realize that trends are strange for these kids. Some of the best athletes in school were walking around with Sponge Bob, Spiderman, and Dora the Explorer back packs. Don't ask me to explain it. The fact is, you would never do it nor would I, so obviously we're not dialed in on what fashions urban kids care about.

By the way, also realize that trends are strange for these kids. Some of the best athletes in school were walking around with Sponge Bob, Spiderman, and Dora the Explorer back packs. Don't ask me to explain it. The fact is, you would never do it nor would I, so obviously we're not dialed in on what fashions urban kids care about.

Speak for yourself. I've been a baller from day 1 and I do know what the ballers like and wear. I'm not trying to make myself sound like some ballin thug wannabe, however I've been around it enough to know and still am. I also worked at Footaction- We'd open the store at Midnight and have lines outside waiting at the gate for the new Jordan release. Sorry Jethro, the black to white ratio there was about 90-10. And when I wasn't working, I have been in those lines myself. You are obviously not in touch with what ballers like, because you worked at AH for months and have no clue. You say "they don't seem to give a crap."

Are you really telling me that inner-city kids don't care about appearance and the way things look?

Are we talking about the same ballers that live in near poverty yet they have diamond crusted chains, new J's on their feet, and they are rollin' on dubs? Yeah, you're right Jethro ballers don't care about appearance. Wow!

Wow, this thread really got out of hand. All I was trying to say that I was pissed that Michigan was switching to adidas and in my opinion the quality of the product is nowhere near Nike's. I'm pissed that all of the new hats, T-shirts, sweatshirts, jerseys, etc. that will be for sale until 2017 will not look as cool as they did when Nike was producing them. I do agree with Tre's angle that it may affect recruiting slightly. No, a kid isn't going to commit elsewhere because Michigan isn't wearing Nike uniforms anymore. It's just part of the package. If a kid wants to go to Michigan and thinks it's the best fit for him he will, but if a kid is sizing up a few schools and the whole package, he may think about the gear he'll be wearing. I know I would. Call me materialistic, but I just want to feel and look tight as I take the field or the court and I think recruits think the same way.

Once again Tre takes things in exactly the wrong way. Yes, ballers care about their appearance. No, ballers do NOT care what YOU think about their appearance.
Ballers have confidence, and if they decide they're going to rock something a bunch of crackers aren't feeling, guess what? It's the crackers problem, not theirs (in their minds).

Again, UCLA is ranked pretty high in the preseason and they've had plenty of recruiting success. Obviously adidas wasn't an issue.

MIGHT it change the attitude one one baller that was considering UM? If it was the ONLY factor, maybe. But weigh the potential differences that particular money could have in getting the facilities upgraded and I think that will outweigh the fact that there's one logo on their uni instead of a different logo. If cats are really that hung up on Jordans, they'll wear the gear around campus. Nobody's stopping them from that.

Threads like this show a fan's true colors. Moodini and I are talking about something so miniscule. We never said that Michigan was now going to lose all kinds of recruits. Never said their teams would suck now. Just made a comment about how it really sucks for the fans that like the tight Nike gear. And it sucks because it lowers the appeal or "cool level" of a school in the eyes of recruits. When I say that, I'm talking its importance maybe weighs in at about 2% of the entire picture for recruits. Yet, you throw out anything even slightly negative about Michigan and you'll get a firestorm from some fans.

Before we even posted about this, Moodini and I went through the WTF regulars and nailed who this would matter to and who would take the "blind love no matter what Michigan does is right" approach. Some of you just can't handle even the slightest negative comment. I'm the first to defend MSU, but I can also criticize at times given the topic. Listen, it's okay to not be happy about something your team does. Doesn't make you less of a fan. And just because something is posted here doesn't mean we think it's a major event. It's the offseason, we can discuss small things.

So being exited about the much appreciated increase in money and valuing that more than a logo is blind love? And it shows my true colors? Did you just invent this in your mind, or are you saying I'm a sell out and you've known it for a long time. Did my argument even matter? Did you read my reasoning? Or do you just "blindly" disagree with me?

So being exited about the much appreciated increase in money and valuing that more than a logo is blind love? And it shows my true colors? Did you just invent this in your mind, or are you saying I'm a sell out and you've known it for a long time. Did my argument even matter? Did you read my reasoning? Or do you just "blindly" disagree with me?

I'm saying that it wouldn't matter if Michigan signed a deal with Addidas for less money, some fans here would find an angle to make it into a good thing. I'll admit though, I have more respect for fans like this than I do fairweather fans. However, sometimes the blind love is annoying. Kinda like loving your team so much that your rationalize taking Darko over Wade, Bosh, and Melo. haha Sorry, to throw it out there but just a perfect example of blind love and no I'm not just talking about your Jethro.

Even then I would have taken Bosh. I didn't want Melo and didn't think Wade fit a need. I was obviously wrong.

Anyhow, it absolutely would have mattered if the adidas deal was for less money.

If I was a blind fan, I would think that DeBord was a great offensive coordinator. I would think that David Cone was the greatest backup QB in the history of the game. I would be giddy as a schoolgirl that UM isn't getting instate recruits.

I love Puma. :inquisitive:

We played in a shootout this weekend with some of the best talent in the entire state. I watched the Michigan Mustangs (1 of the top AAU teams in the midwest) take on Noopy Crater's squad. I did a quick little count on the starting fives for fun with this thread in mind since some of the best talent in Michigan was on the court.

5-Nike
3-Jordan (Jordan is a Nike brand for the...umm...older crowd here that are...ummm...lets just say slightly removed from the footlocker crowd)

1-Reebok
1-Addidas

I know, ridiculous post, but I thought it would be funny to count em up.

I rocked Adidas at the gym today. Looked damn smooth too.

Remember back in the day when Joe was rocking New Balance?

At least UM doesn't have LA Gear Hakeem Olajuwon (actually, back then it was just Akeem).

I rocked Payless Super V Action Air Cushion Dynamos while I was falling off the roof trying to fix my gutters today.

Horrible news.

Adidas is fucking horrible. The material they use for their products is horrid.

Cheaper material = lower durability

Horrible news.

Adidas is fucking horrible. The material they use for their products is horrid.

Cheaper material = lower durability

Finally, a cogent argument. But what type of material do they use as compared to Nike?

I'm totally over this argument as it has fizzled, but just a random discussion comment>> look at the Michigan jersey I posted and the Wisconsin one next to it. Look how Nike has the good dri-fit material all the way to the bottom of the number and then the mesh starts. Look how the mesh for Addidas cover nearly the entire jersey going up past the top of the number. If they corrected details like this, I'd feel it more.

I understand the Adidas jock strap has a hole in it in case a player gets a boner during a game. That's pretty innovative.

I hate the pipping that Nike had on the UM uniforms. I am hoping they go back to the old style.

Adidias uses cheap materials and Nike uses slave labor. Lovely world.

Bought some adidas gear today. Feel it. Wearing it to Tre's house in the near future.

Bought some adidas gear today. Feel it. Wearing it to Tre's house in the near future.

He's wearing it right now while we fire up the new 08 addition of NCAA football. He jumped out of his seat as Mike Hart broke a long one and the pants tore right down the ass crack. I said, "Well at least you can wear them during bball season like that." Jethro-"What do you mean?" Tre-"They'll be good pants to wear when UM takes it in the ass all bball season long."

Don't have a link, I read this on The Wolverine, but apparently Texas A&M is switching from Nike to adidas too. So I guess McGuffie better be feeling adidas either way. I also heard Texas is switching too.

It's a takover bitches!

Those teams are now doomed.

Looks like all the recroots will either go to Oregon or Michigan State.

Don't have a link, I read this on The Wolverine, but apparently Texas A&M is switching from Nike to adidas too. So I guess McGuffie better be feeling adidas either way. I also heard Texas is switching too.

It's a takover bitches!

Hot and cold?

He was cold until he saw me rockin my gear yesterday and realized it was far better than anything that lame Oregon based Phil Knight organization can produce. lol

Hot and cold?
What do you mean? I'm still pissed off about this and not feeling it at all. It just felt good that other schools are getting jicked over too.

What do you mean? I'm still pissed off about this and not feeling it at all. It just felt good that other schools are getting jicked over too. I thought your post about Texas etc. was an early sign of possible Moodini hot and cold, thought you were ready to start hyping it.

I decided I didn't like my adidas gear. I don't like the people it associates me with. I would never want to rock the same gear as Duncan, KG, TMac, Chauncey, Dwight Howard or Gilbert Arenas.
I can also understand why HS football players wouldn't want to wear the stuff in college. After all, the last thing they would want to do is be drafted in the first two spots of the NFL draft, like Mario Williams or the Overrated Reggie Bush. Since they both rock adidas, it would be best to avoid anything like that. Horrible, absolutely horrible. The worst thing you can be is overrated.

What do these athletes have in common other than the fact that they are either the best to ever play their sport and other than the fact that they are the biggest endorsement names in the history of sports?

Michael Jordan
Tiger Woods
Lebron James
Barry Sanders
Jerry Rice
LT2
Lance Armstrong
ARod
Bonds
Roy Jones Jr.
Tom Brady
Brett Favre

Michael Jordan: Strippers and divorce
Tiger Woods: Had a kid, dropped off the planet
Barry Sanders: Quits in his prime
LeBron James: Jury still out, has plenty of time to fuck up
Jerry Rice: I'll give you that one
LT2: I'm guessing Ladaninian Thomlinson, that's also a gimme
Lance Armstrong: Nike probably gave him cancer, doping and steroid allegations, drops wife and kids like a hot potato when he becomes famous
ARod: Stripper girlfriend, wife rocking a (no doubt Nike) shirt telling fans to fuck off, the new "Mr. May"
Barry Bonds: Maybe Nike caused his feet to grow three sizes after turning 35, and we know the rest of the story
Roy Jones: Give you that one
Brady: Two models pregnant at same time, hairplugs
Brett Favre: One great season, hanging on and now killing Packers by not leting them develop young QB's

I'll rock Adidas.

Bill Martin talks Adidas, Part 1
Posted by Jim Carty July 22, 2007 06:00AM
Categories: Wolverines Basketball, Wolverines Football
Friday morning was a good time to be Bill Martin.

The University of Michigan athletic director was fresh off announcing a $13.6 million budget surplus and gaining approval for a $26.1 million football field house at Thursday's Board of Regents meeting, and only hours from heading north to sail.

Thursday's news capped what might be the most eventful 12 months in Martin's seven-year tenure as athletic director. He hired two new basketball coaches in John Beilein and Kevin Borseth and locked baseball coach Rich Maloney up to a long-term deal. He's overseeing the building of, or has secured approval for, a new baseball stadium, a new softball stadium, a new soccer complex, and, of course, the largest renovation and expansion of Michigan Stadium since it was built in 1927.

Now, it's out with Nike and in with Adidas, complete with a $6.5 million signing bonus, the first such bonus in college sports history according to Martin. The deal is worth $7.5 million annually, $3.5 million more than Michigan was receiving under an expiring deal with Nike.

Before setting sail Friday, Martin talked sat down with The Ann Arbor News to talk about details of how the Adidas deal came to pass, how the money might be spent, and the recent controversy involving the Big Ten Network.

Q: What are the mechanics of how this deal happened?

Martin: We have had a wonderful 7-year arrangement with Nike. We've been good long-term partners and you develop personal relationships. Our relationships with the fellas I deal with, the fellas our equipment people deal with, have been very good, very solid. I have a very good relationship with a fella named Kip Morris, who runs Nike College Sports Marketing. That's something I'll miss, the relationships. We're looking forward to our new relationship with Adidas, but it's hard in some respects to leave folks you've had a good relationship with.

But the mechanics of how this came about is two-fold. One, it said in our contract that (before a) date in February, the parties will sit down and negotiate a new contract. Then, after that date, we can go out and solicit other potential suppliers. Nike retained a right of first refusal. They could have matched. So, if you look at this, Michigan didn't leave Nike, Nike left Michigan. They could have matched. They choose not to do that.

Adidas is a strong international company with their roots in soccer. They're a very, very strong company internationally. They and Nike are the two giants, obviously.

The time period came and Adidas approached us and we started talking. I had had our general council's office FOIA some of the Adidas contracts and other Nike contracts, so I could see where other people were at.

We began negotiating, when we were permitted under the contract, with Adidas. Did you know Adidas' and Nike's headquarters are cross-town from each other in Portland? That's a part I find interesting. It's because Adidas hired a guy away from Nike years ago, and he said, 'I'll come with you, but it's got to be in Portland, because that's where I live.' Really interesting.

So, here's Nike with an offer they say would be the highest contract they have in college sports, and I'm still concerned, because these are long-term deals. How ever I set this up is going to impact this place for a long, long time. The long and short of it is, we were very fortunate with our timing. Adidas was hungry to have a major college brand and they laser focused on us. If you look at their strategy, they take one or two schools in every conference, and that's it, whereas Nike tries to saturate the country with all schools. (Adidas) has Tennessee, Notre Dame, UCLA and Wisconsin. Everybody has said Notre Dame has the richest Adidas contract, but you can't get it, because it's a private institution. I know this contract exceeds it.

I'll name some of the unique features in this contract. There is a $6.5 million signing bonus. There is never a signing bonus. We're going to get it in two weeks. What am I going to use it for? I have to finish up this facility stuff and get Crisler going. If I had any spare bucks, it'd go into endowing scholarships. It's pretty simple.

We've got an annual (Consumer Price Index) escalator. Annual.

We got a most favored program clause. There's never going to be an Adidas school that gets a nickel more than us, either in product or money.

Q: How important was the favored program clause?

Martin: Very important, if they raise the cap. They may say, hey, no problem, we're not going to pay anybody else any more than this. I don't know. But over an 8-year period, there's a chance that will happen. I couldn't get that from Nike. I wanted it, and they said they would guarantee we'd have the highest contract at the time the contract was signed.

Q: It's interesting to me how much that particular clause has meant to your fans. It's gotten a lot of buzz.

Martin: Did it? That's a pride factor. Nobody is going to be better than us. I'm glad they recognize that, because it was important to me. It makes me feel like I did my job.

The other thing we received is that ... you know, markets go in cycles. Eight years from now, who knows what the situation is going to be economically. The market may be way below where it is now. I've seen that happen in my business career. Well, guess what? We have the option to extend. It's no lose. If the market's gone up, we negotiate a new deal. If the market's gone down, we say we like this deal and we'll keep it another five years.

Q: Money aside, what kind of homework did you do on Adidas' product and quality?

Martin: We had (football equipment manager) big Johnny Falk call all his peers at Adidas schools and ask what are the good things and what are the bad things about it. No bad things came back. Great quality. Good inventory control and delivery. Matched the right colors. As (softball coach Carol Hutchins) said to me, 'We're not gold, we're not yellow - we're maize, and they better get maize right.' So we felt comfortable about that.

The other thing they're doing is they're going to put two people on our campus, one for men's sports and one for women's sports, to handle the day-to-day, in-and-out challenges.

Q: Full-time?

Martin: Full-time, on their nickel, forever. They put one person on everybody else's campus, they're putting two on ours. They want to make certain.

Q: What changes will come with the new deal that the average fan can or will see?

Martin:The other thing I felt was important - and Nike did agree to this in the end - I wanted control of the sideline design apparel for football. If you turn on the TV, forget the colors, you can tell if one of the schools is a Nike school because of the swatch of color they have down from under the armpit, right? That's Nike's way of branding every school a Nike school. We didn't want to be like everyone else. We wanted our own design.

So we got the ability to work with Adidas to create unique sideline apparel for football. That was important to us.

Q: Which takes me to another question: Does this new contract mean a uniform redesign for football?

Martin: Not necessarily at all. We haven't really talked about that. I think everybody loves the classic look of our uniforms now.

Q: They don't want to put their stamp on it?

Martin: They might want to, but it's ultimately our call. Stuff like that should be evolutionary, not revolutionary. Sideline apparel really sells, so whatever the coaches wear, people want that.

Bill Martin talks Adidas, Part 2
Posted by Jim Carty July 23, 2007 06:00AM
Categories: Wolverines Basketball, Wolverines Football
After detailing the story behind the University of Michigan's new sponsorship deal with Adidas in a Sunday question-and-answer entry, our interview with athletic director Bill Martin continues today addresses questions about using the Adidas money toward a Crisler Arena renovation, Michigan's athletic finances, and the Big Ten Network.

We start with how Martin will use the revenue created from a deal worth $7.5 million annually, $3.5 million more per year than Michigan was receiving from an expiring deal with Nike.

Q: Let's talk more about how you're going to spend the money. You said some of it will go toward a Crisler renovation ...

Martin: It's got to.

Q: How much?

Martin: We haven't decided. It's so soon. Our focus was to get the deal done.

Q: Let's talk in loose terms, a lot of it?

Martin: I really don't know. Remember, Crisler is a university-owned building, built with student fees. So it will be a joint project with the university when it comes to financing Crisler. I'm putting about $800,000 of lights into Crisler this summer. I lightened the floor as much as possible. ... That's what I can do now.

We finish our infrastructure study in August or September, which tells us all the mechanicals and that stuff that we have to do. I'm certain that's going to flow into a project. It just has to. It's time to do that. It's well overdue.

Q: How about this: Could the Adidas revenue provide a significant helpful boost to a Crisler project?

Martin: Yes. It could be a help, as could some of the Big Ten revenues coming in.

I now have some steady streams. I've stabilized the annual budget. From a business perspective of Michigan athletics, my first priority was to stabilize the annual budget. I've now done that. I've done it with the help of 35 percent of our football season ticket holders with the PSD (preferred seating donation). I've taken the Big Ten revenues and we're giving $2 million back to the university. We're a good university citizen. They are using that money for need-based aid. We pay retail price for all of our athletic scholarships. When I started, we paid the university $8 million annually; it's over $13 now. Think about that.

This football season is the third one in a row where I have not raised prices. Show me something else in society where prices haven't risen for three years.

Q: A cynic has to point out that you did institute the PSDs in that period.

Martin: Absolutely, but I haven't raised those since, either, and - again - it's only 35 percent of the seats.

Q: So the bulk of the Adidas money will go toward a Crisler project and endowed scholarships?

Martin: No - facilities. Facilities and endowed scholarships. I would say all of it. How it breaks down? To be determined.

Q: You talked about Big Ten revenue. Are you concerned about the rough waters the Big Ten Network finds itself in? (The new network is struggling to get picked up by major cable operators in the Midwest)

Martin: We anticipated this. Jim Delany counseled us on this a year ago. Fox counseled us on this. Do I think it will get resolved? Sure I do. One way or another, we'll get it resolved. I feel very good about it. Long term, it's going to be tremendous, and I'm not thinking in terms of the money, I thinking about exposure.

We want it on basic (cable). We don't want it on a premium sports tier. The Golf Channel, Versus, they're on basic. What we're going to provide is much more exciting to our state and region.

Q: Are you prepared for a flood of angry e-mails if some football games aren't on the local cable outlet this fall because a deal hasn't been reached?

Martin: Join the list (laughs). I don't fret about that stuff. We'll be fine. This is exciting, what's happening in the Big Ten with that channel.

Q: Are you concerned it's become a public fight?

Martin: I don't like seeing it. I don't.

Q: You've gotten a lot done lately. You hired two basketball coaches. You've gotten Rich Maloney locked up long-term. You've done this deal with Adidas. You've got the baseball stadium and softball stadium ...

Martin: We got the new field house (Thursday) and a new soccer stadium on the way. OK, what's the next thing we've got to do? Let's get on with it. Maybe at some point I'll take a deep breath and think about it, but now I just deal with the short-term and long-term challenges we face here.

Q: So what's the next priority?

Martin: You analyze, you plan, then you execute. We have a lot of balls in the air. I have to execute what we've started. I have to deliver that football stadium on time, on budget. I have to lease that premium seating. I have to deal with the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) issue - and we'll do that, it's a very important issue in our society. I just want to get this place so that whenever I leave here the job description is, "Don't screw it up."

When I started, we paid the university $8 million annually; it's over $13 now. Think about that.

This football season is the third one in a row where I have not raised prices. Show me something else in society where prices haven't risen for three years.

Q: A cynic has to point out that you did institute the PSDs in that period.

Martin: Absolutely, but I haven't raised those since, either, and - again - it's only 35 percent of the seats.

Think about that? Yeah motherfucker. College tuition is skyrocketting in Michigan thanks to the economy. Think about every kid looking at college as an option and having to swallow the same type of 40% increase. Think about that? I think you sound like a douche.

Only 35% of the ticket is a pretty big fucking piece.

Seems silly to put all that money into facilities when all the good recruits aren't coming now.

Send that $ to Nike schools so they can use it there.

U of M is going to lose so much money on this deal.

HORRIBLE DECISION.

A new soccer stadium? WTF??? A shithole basketball stadium, and Tom Izzo signing every recruit for the next twelve years, and uM gets a fucking SOCCER STADIUM???

Congrats they get to bolster one of da biggest faggot ass sports in the history of mens athletics. No one even goes to da soccer games, Ill be surprised if its half filled.

You seriously read that whole article and you're concentrating on the part about Soccer? Do you think that an AD at any school just sits around and works with the football and basketball teams exclusively? I think its time to calm down just a little bit there son.

Seems silly to put all that money into facilities when all the good recruits aren't coming now.

Send that $ to Nike schools so they can use it there.

U of M is going to lose so much money on this deal.

HORRIBLE DECISION.

Once again you show up and interupt a good post with some sarcastic bs. Do us a favor and come back with something of quality, I'm so tired of your lame ass posts where you offer NOTHING to the conversation. Zip beat you out with his prior post-that's bad dude.

I'm with Zip on this one, "I never once raised prices." What a fucking joke! No, you required season ticket holders to reserve their seat with a 1,000 "donation" each year. What a bunch of shit, I would love to talk to this guy in person and call him out.

I like how Michigan and some of their fans have claimed this is a great deal because now they can use this money to improve facilities. You are freaking Michigan! It costs 20,000 a year on tuition alone! You have been #1 in retail sales for years! Are you claiming you really need money to do these things?! WTF

Tre:
I didn't make the comment about Martin bragging he hasn't raised prices, but I agree with it. I also think PSL'sor whatever, on a college level at least, are a serious Fuck You to people who have filled your 100,000 seat stadium seven to eight times a year for the last three decades.
Bill Martin sounds like every business owner who has ever lived: "Geezus, we're fucking broke! I don;t know how I'll feed my kids. Can't give you a raise, Gabberdelch"--then the guy jets off to Tahiti to buy a new resort for his grandson who just married a pregnant stripper.

Tre doesn't like my posts.

:emo kid:

Don't anyone dare say that he just blindly endorses posts from any old fellow Spartan. You have to toe the Sparty party line to get Tre's endorsement around here.

Tre doesn't like my posts.

:emo kid:

Don't anyone dare say that he just blindly endorses posts from any old fellow Spartan. You have to toe the Sparty party line to get Tre's endorsement around here.

No, you simply have to add something meaningful to the conversation once in awhile. I'm not asking much. There are plenty of UMers that I endorse here for the quality of their posts. I don't have to agree with you, you just have to come with some decent takes. TommyZ is a die-hard UMer and I love his shit.

So try posting an opinion instead of a sarcastic comment or joke once in awhile, or stop interrupting a good discussion.

Thanks for the lecture/advice.

I'll be sure to keep that in mind.

Why can't we all post like Tre?

Thanks for the lecture/advice.

I'll be sure to keep that in mind.

Why can't we all post like Tre?

Even The Izzo has a schlong only so big

I'm with Zip on this one, "I never once raised prices." What a fucking joke! No, you required season ticket holders to reserve their seat with a 1,000 "donation" each year. What a bunch of shit, I would love to talk to this guy in person and call him out.

I like how Michigan and some of their fans have claimed this is a great deal because now they can use this money to improve facilities. You are freaking Michigan! It costs 20,000 a year on tuition alone! You have been #1 in retail sales for years! Are you claiming you really need money to do these things?! WTF

I'm sure none of the tuition goes into the things that actually make it one of the top academic institutions in the country. Remember, this is a university first. I'm certain that very little, if any, of the tuition goes into the athletics.

I'm sure none of the tuition goes into the things that actually make it one of the top academic institutions in the country. Remember, this is a university first. I'm certain that very little, if any, of the tuition goes into the athletics.

You don't think tuition goes toward athletics? An average Michigan student spends 100,000 on their education at Michigan. So 100,000 times how many students? You think that number just pays for professors, workers, and up-keep?

Tre:
It is my understanding that most athletic departments operate separately from the university as a whole. So no, the athletic department for UM doesn't receive money from academic monies, and vice versa. I bet MSU is the same way. It's been that way for quite awhile. Duh.

You don't think tuition goes toward athletics? An average Michigan student spends 100,000 on their education at Michigan. So 100,000 times how many students? You think that number just pays for professors, workers, and up-keep?

Lol

Athletic departments at the D1 level run on their own revenue. So all the money that Michigan football makes has to sustain the athletic programs, such as field hockey, that may be successful but generate less revenue than it costs to have the program.

I'm actually a little shocked that you thought otherwise. By the way, I hope you realize that running UM's medical school requires much more than paying instructors. You have facilities, materials, etc. Cutting edge technology in education isn't constituted by paying a professor and a janitor.

Regardless, they have still been #1 in sales and they still put 100,000 in the seats at 50+ a pop. I don't think they are hurting.

Nope not hurting and he is doing things the right way and not going into 100 mil in debt just to please fans of other schools or his own.

#4 Dual Threat QB in the Nation MarQuies Gray:

Oregon: "It is a school that will allow me to get away from home and be on my own. My mom tells me the decision is up to me and if I want to get away from home that is fine with her. I also really love their uniforms, but that won't impact my decision. My coach talks with their coaches a lot and I hear that I am their No. 1 target in 2008 at quarterback."

Hmmmm...kindof sounds like something Moodini and I were talking about. Won't make him choose for or against a school, but given a paragraph to comment about the school, he felt the need to talk about their uni's above so many other things.

So you think that's because of a Nike symbol? People love the UM uni because of the winged helmet and the colors. You better hope guys are feeling more than just the Nike, because there are plenty of better schools with pretty cool uni's in other ways that also feature the symbol.

Yup, if ONE kid says it, then he speaks for everyone.
We're all doomed. Oregon is on the verge of winning the next 54 national championships.

What else is there to love about Oregon?

I like Oregon's uniforms too but not because of the brand, because of the colors. You're really grasping at straws here Tre.

I like Oregon's uniforms too but not because of the brand, because of the colors. You're really grasping at straws here Tre.

No, I'm not. I said that a school's appeal can be affected by that which they wear. I cited Oregon as a prime example of a Nike school that has gotten the attention of recruits in part because of their crazy new Nike Uni's. Here is what I said:


Originally Posted by DrTre11
No, I'm saying that the Nike brand and the uniforms and apparal add to the appeal of a school. If you deny that, you are not in touch with kids today.

For instance, let's take a Nike school like Oregon for example. Which is more tied to Nike than any other school. And compare them with Wisconsin which is an addidas school. Ask an kid which would be the cooler school to go to, to play football or basketball. See what answer you get.

What do ya know, a kid that Oregon is recruiting mentioned it. Just one example of school appeal.

Found a similar mb discussion on the whole Nike thing. Found this post interesting:


This is very simple:

Fat, balding, over 40, male sportswriters and fans HATE them.

Young, fit, urban, blue chip recruits LOVE them.

Look at Oregon's spike in success since 1998 when they were introduced.

Cover of SI
Front page of USAToday
etc.

If you dont have tradition then you need something else. Oregon has...excitement (for 18-21 year olds)

Posted by: Very Simple | 12:11:14 AM

Oregon's uniforms are a gimmick.

So their media exposure has gone up with their 117 different possible uniform combinations. Has their recruiting ranking gone through the roof? Have they won more games?

Meanwhile, comparing them to an adidas school is off because they don't even compare to other Nike schools.

I'm sure if adidas decided to make some seriously ridiculous uniforms and had one schools commit to rocking multiple different color combinations they could get just as much attention. But would they want it?

Oregon's uniforms are a gimmick.

Totally agree! But wait, if what a school wears doesn't matter to recruits at all, then why would Oregon try a uniform gimmick? GOTCHA

So their media exposure has gone up with their 117 different possible uniform combinations. Has their recruiting ranking gone through the roof? Have they won more games?


How many times do I have to say it? School appeal will not win you more games! My arguement the entire time is that Nike effects school appeal and a school's appeal can get the attention of some recruits and be a small little factor when trying to draw kids in.

You guys have argued that it has no influence whatsoever, but when you are proven wrong, then you go to the "will it win you more games?" topic. Never said it would.

Totally agree! But wait, if what a school wears doesn't matter to recruits at all, then why would Oregon try a uniform gimmick? GOTCHA

Because they, like other misinformed people, think it does matter. Phil Knight has them wrapped around his junk. It's his prescence in that area that made it happen. Much like UM went for adidas when the dollars came calling, Phil Knight pours money into Oregon. That's why they're doing it. Notice anyone else jumping on board?

Tre, your circular logic is pathetic.

They (Oregon) do it because they crave relevance and they saw a niche and are trying to fill it with a gimmick.

You got me, alright.

I'll await your standard formulaic repsonse.

*insult* *self congratulation* *insult* *self congratulation*

How many times do I have to say it? School appeal will not win you more games! My arguement the entire time is that Nike effects school appeal and a school's appeal can get the attention of some recruits and be a small little factor when trying to draw kids in.

You guys have argued that it has no influence whatsoever, but when you are proven wrong, then you go to the "will it win you more games?" topic. Never said it would.

I missed the point of being proven wrong. Must have skipped that line. Was it because they were front page on SI and USA Today? Did you read those articles? I admit I didn't read the SI one, but I was travelling across the country with my father last summer when the USA Today article came out (either that or it was a USA Today from a different trip he went on that he had sitting around his house) and I read the article because I was amazed that their ugly uniforms had gone so far. Yeah, they get attention, but the article wasn't exactly praising the move. Meanwhile, media outlets such as ESPN continue to rip the uniforms as being an embarrassment to the game of equal proportion to Boise State's blue field. I don't know, is the blue field sponsored by Nike? I bet guys go there just for the field. Of course, their alternative is going to Wyoming, but they have brown and yellow uni's and nobody wants to look like the inside of a toilet, right?

HORRIBLE DECISION.

Okay, now that this discussion is several weeks old, can you (Tre) explain again why this was such a "horrible decision"? You've changed positions a few times so let's get it out on the table all nice and clear.

Save the insults for one post, um-k?

Okay, now that this discussion is several weeks old, can you (Tre) explain again why this was such a "horrible decision"? You've changed positions a few times so let's get it out on the table all nice and clear.

Save the insults for one post, um-k?

I NEVER CHANGED MY POSITION ONCE. I'm sorry if this comes acrossed as an insult, but when you ask me to explain my stance when I've done so 4-5 times, I question intelligence.

Lets explain it again. I believe Nike makes the best stuff out there. Nike is the best in regards to sports technology, apparel, unis, advertising, etc. etc. There is no questioning Nike being the king company in sports. When you go with Nike, they provide you with a great look that appeals to the under 30 age bracket.

For the under 30 fans out there, this was a HORRIBLE DECISION. I'm 26. So to me, and moodini, and bball11, etc. this was a horrible decision. Why? You want your team looking great and you want to be able to buy great team apparel.

Now I said that Nike can effect the appeal of your university because of the look they provide. Do looks matter to high schoolers? Do I have to answer that? So can a look make your university more appealing to recruits? yes. For those of you that jump to conclusions, let's answer the jumping to conclusions questions once more:

>Will a recruit not come to Michigan now that they are with Addidas? No
>Will Michigan now suck because they don't have a swoosh on their uni? No
>Is this a "HUGE DEAL?" Let me carefully explain so you don't think I'm "changing my stance." No in regards to overall performace, grand scheme of things, etc. etc. Huge deal for younger guys like Moodini and I that want to rock the great gear and have our teams look tight? Yup.

Do you understand my take after 15 paragraphs now?

Yes, that does clarify it.

This is a HORRIBLE DECISION for guys like you.

It sure sounded like you were saying that this was a HORRIBLE DECISION for Michigan (see the last few lines of post #6 in this thread), but I don't see that in your most recent post, so thanks for clarifying further.

Yes, that does clarify it.

This is a HORRIBLE DECISION for guys like you.

It sure sounded like you were saying that this was a HORRIBLE DECISION for Michigan (see the last few lines of post #6 in this thread), but I don't see that in your most recent post, so thanks for clarifying further.

That's all I was saying the entire time. From a younger guy perspective, it was a mistake and sucky for those that care about gear.

I guess I still don't see why the gear is considered sucky. I've had both and I didn't experience an amazing difference in performance.

So it seems like the difference in the gear is actually just about a logo. So what, is this the difference between the kid that was wearing a polo logo on the exact same shirt that didn't have the polo logo? btw, I know you feel polo and that wasn't a personal shot, just the most obvious.

Nike Uniforms and Team Gear looks better. Go to Nike.com and check out the authentic uniforms and then go to Addidas.com and check out the authentic uniforms.

I just called Sonny Vaccaro and told him that kids under 30 thought adidas was whack. He hung up on me. Later, his wife called me and reminded me that Sonny, who blew up the legends of Nike's biggest stars, also left Nike for Adidas once upon a time and the best HS players still followed him.

Nike Uniforms and Team Gear looks better. Go to Nike.com and check out the authentic uniforms and then go to Addidas.com and check out the authentic uniforms.

I'm sure that you realize that this is completely subjective.

I'm sure that you realize that this is completely subjective.

Yup. My opinion. I bet 99% under 30 would agree with me. 99% above 30 would disagree. There are exceptions and very cool, up to date people above 30, don't get me wrong. I have friends this way. But, I'm just speaking in general.

Think about it, parents ALWAYS hate the new styles and what is "in." The kids love it. This is just a generation gap type of thing. But, if you are finding yourself hating new styles and looks, you might ask yourself if you're becoming your parents (the thing you most likely always said you wouldn't do).

I love that those who dissagree with Tre are just not up to date.

Yup. My opinion. I bet 99% under 30 would agree with me. 99% above 30 would disagree. There are exceptions and very cool, up to date people above 30, don't get me wrong. I have friends this way. But, I'm just speaking in general.

Think about it, parents ALWAYS hate the new styles and what is "in." The kids love it. This is just a generation gap type of thing. But, if you are finding yourself hating new styles and looks, you might ask yourself if you're becoming your parents (the thing you most likely always said you wouldn't do).

Yes, you are generalizing.

Mix in a little condescension, especially the last line, and you have another classic Tre post.

Its like a McCosky article.

I openly said I'm generalizing. Glenn, Fool, whoever may very well be looking tight and cool as I post this. But for the most part, those who are constantly hating new styles are generally falling into parent land. Maybe that's not you, just thought I'd put the warning out there for those that are wavering.

Nike is a new style?

Yep, Air Jordans are just now getting cool. So when I wore them (before switching to Adidas Torsion, of course) I was way ahead of the curve. Now I'm way behind.

Look, I'll say this, the shoes I wear right now are Nike running shoes. I had New Balance before that, because they are the best running shoe, and before that I had Adidas. The last 4 pairs before that were Nike. I agree that, FOR SHOES, I have usually gravitated toward Nike. For gear, I would say I have 4 or 5 other pieces of Nike apparel and 3 or 4 Adidas. I've never said Adidas was clearly better. Sure, Nike probably has more street cred as well.

My baseline argument, though, is that I highly doubt recruits care as much as some might think. ALSO, when I've bought Michigan gear (probably own close to 20 pieces of UM gear), I could have cared less if it has a swoosh or not. Now that Adidas will be making gear, I'll still buy the gear because it's UM gear first and foremost. The manufacturer and their logo has never mattered to me in terms of UM gear. I would say that generally (my turn) applies to 95% of the people, regardless of age, buying UM gear. The few that feel put out by the switch will just have to get over it. Not a big factor at all in the decision.

95% of people don't care? Couldn't disagree more. Now they might not say, "hey, I'm not buying it because it doesn't have a swoosh." But, they might buy it or not buy it based on how it looks. Does it look good or bad? You can find 10 million Michigan pieces of clothing out there, so you're going to choose those that you like the appearance of. 95% of people do care what they are spending their money on.

Just watched the ESPN Who's Now Final between Tiger and Lebron. Nearly 20 seconds into the debate, all members of the panel start talking about how they are both Nike athletes.

Seems like the rest of the world realizes the power and influence of Nike, except for a few members here.

95% of people don't care? Couldn't disagree more. Now they might not say, "hey, I'm not buying it because it doesn't have a swoosh." But, they might buy it or not buy it based on how it looks. Does it look good or bad? You can find 10 million Michigan pieces of clothing out there, so you're going to choose those that you like the appearance of. 95% of people do care what they are spending their money on.

Sure, this applies if you're talking about gay Meijer gear versus major brand stuff. We're talking about the slights differences between two massive shoe powerhouses. I'm saying 95% won't care about the differences between adidas and Nike gear. They're going to buy Michigan gear. There will be good looking stuff so that they don't have to buy the zebra striped Meijer crap. Adidas is going to make good looking stuff. They already do.

Don't be surprised if you don't see much Michigan Addidas apparal in stores. Addidas and Reebok do not have alot of college gear other than jerseys. You can look through Eastbay and see that there is a big difference. That's why State dropped Reebok, they didn't make shit for them and that was during the height of the bball and fball programs.

So you think they spent all that $ with no plan to increase their product mix or distribution?

Again, I'm going to disagree with you.

The only way that they have a chance to have this make sense is to sell the shit out of this stuff. Marketing buzz and TV air time is nice, but they need to sell product, too.

I think they'll have to increase the stuff they put out.

Here are the things you know they'll have to do right away - get their logo on a handful of t-shirts, including official student t-shirt for Maize Out and Maize Rage. Throw together a half dozen hats. Kick out some jerseys. Maybe a warm up. That's going to be more than enough for the average fan. The majority of the people spending their money on UM gear aren't looking for it in the Eastbay catalog. Having said that, it's only a matter of time before adidas expands their line. They wouldn't be gunning for these schools if they didn't plan to make a run for the top.

Okay, why is UM still wearing Nike?

I know that the agreement doesn't start until next year, but they should have been able to get out of the deal, even if they had to have adidas buy it out for them.

LOL@the final season of Nike being one of the worst years in Michigan football recent history

Okay, why is UM still wearing Nike?

I know that the agreement doesn't start until next year, but they should have been able to get out of the deal, even if they had to have adidas buy it out for them.

LOL@the final season of Nike being one of the worst years in Michigan football recent history

Wow, ummm...probably because the Nike contract ran through this year.

http://blog.mlive.com/wolverines_stories/2008/01/medium_080103_lloyd_carr_hotel.jpg

Lloyd Carr rocking the new Adidas gear after beating the Gators

LOL! so glad someone revived this.

ditto

great thread

Let's get a poll going to see who here wears what.

I should prolly do the poll.

I rock Goodwill.

I rock Salvation Army with Payless shoes. High heels also when I get too many drinks in me.

I rock a different brand. It's called "Your Momma's World".

Sorry, I miss 7th grade sometimes.

That was a good one!


I'm wearing my mom's nightgown as I type this.

Um, you realize that by that I was really saying...

I rock your momma's world, right?

I don't actually, nevermind.

I knew what you were saying. It was cogent.

I was worried that perhaps the connection between the two lines was tenuous, at best.

I'm the type who likes making fun of himself.

Example: I actually went out wearing this:

http://www.thehime.com/images/ax2002/crossdresser_sakura.jpg

http://www.guerraeterna.com/archives/Castro_adidas_350.jpg

first look at the new adidas uni's?

http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Site=C4&Date=20080614&Category=SPORTS06&ArtNo=806140804&Ref=PH&Params=Itemnr=4

Who are those recruits?

Who are those recruits?

Don't worry, bukky d will be by shortly to tell us all how poor their entry exam scores were.

I also think Barwis already got ahold of them. They are looking intense!

Ok, that was horrible. But yes, those are adidas unis. Hard to tell what they actually look like on legit players.

Ok, that was horrible. But yes, those are adidas unis. Hard to tell what they actually look like on legit players.

They look identical to West Virginia's jerseys from last year which is a tiny bit ironic.

Look at what wearing Adidas is doing to our players. I believe that was Steve Schilling and Will Johnson pictured. It's going to be a long year...err...8 years.

The pic that Wizzle posted earlier is (obviously) from a women's fantasy camp and showed what could be the new adidas home jerseys. Apparently this pic of the possible away jerseys was snapped at the camp too. What do you think? Look familiar Rich Rod? I heard he had a part in designing the jerseys.

http://bp0.blogger.com/_l4ZZFzs7VIs/SGPVZpGVSbI/AAAAAAAABH0/6cSuBSnUZzQ/s1600/hahaha-losers.jpg
Taken from mgoblog.com.

The pic that Wizzle posted earlier is (obviously) from a women's fantasy camp and showed what could be the new adidas home jerseys. Apparently this pic of the possible away jerseys was snapped at the camp too. What do you think? Look familiar Rich Rod? I heard he had a part in designing the jerseys.

http://bp0.blogger.com/_l4ZZFzs7VIs/SGPVZpGVSbI/AAAAAAAABH0/6cSuBSnUZzQ/s1600/hahaha-losers.jpg
Taken from mgoblog.com.

Your post would be much more effective if "this pic" actually referred to a pic you posted.

Wearing these right now:
http://www.topbrandsdirect.com/WebRoot/TBD/Shops/TBD/44B5/28A4/A3CC/F69C/6F98/C0A8/018D/002D/adi_15_b_bla_500.jpg

I don't mind saying that the little bit of skin that you are showing there is pretty seductive.

I'm out of touch with what ballers like to rock and I'm not ashamed to admit it.

I don't mind saying that the little bit of skin that you are showing there is pretty seductive.

You don't think they make my ass look big??

Maybe in that pic, but I think it's the pose that you're in, it's probably just an illusion.

I guess only you would know for sure.

Maybe this should go in Wil's thread?

Maybe in that pic, but I think it's the pose that you're in, it's probably just an illusion.

I guess only you would know for sure.

*Sigh* There really is nothing I can do, it's in the genes.

Your post would be much more effective if "this pic" actually referred to a pic you posted.

Man, it was there at first. Try this.

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/1271/n2228927430126438361zj8.jpg

If it doesn't work, just go to the site. http://mgoblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/is-this-new-road-jersey.html

Yeesh, I hope not.

That's basically a WVU jersey.

This pic brought to you by Absopure, the only water that makes you more thirsty AFTER you drink it.

Yes, those look a lot like the WVU jerseys, but I don't think they're as dramatically different from what we're used to. When you see them matched up with the winged helmet I think it will still look very Michigan.

Here are the WVU, new U of M and old U of M's in order to compare:
http://images.athlonsports.com/d/5004-1/Slaton_S.jpg
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/1271/n2228927430126438361zj8.jpg
http://gorillacrouch.com/pics/shawncrableaug31

They actually don't look much different. The wider blue around the edges stands out. I don't think the yellow on the side will make much difference.

Theyr'e not that bad, but they definitely have a WVU feel. I don't like the fact that they're screen printed. CHEAP.

Theyr'e not that bad, but they definitely have a WVU feel. I don't like the fact that they're screen printed. CHEAP.

That's ADIDAS for you.

There's a reason that ballers hate that shit.

You feel me, Knockout?

Better.

http://www.football-fanshop.com/Images/Product/51-19/51-19946-P.jpg

http://www.football-fanshop.com/Michigan-Wolverines-Authentic-Football-Jersey_-1786792952_PD.html

When will we be seeing those babies at Walmart?

This is still one of my favorite threads ever, btw.

This thread might be funny to you, but to others it's serious business.

Yeah, what do I know? I'm just a "Dad guy".

I don't know how to relate to the teenage ballers.

I love how he equated being a dad with not being down.

When will we be seeing those babies at Walmart?

That deserves this

http://blog.mediacatalyst.com/images/roflcopter.gif

Yeah, what do I know? I'm just a "Dad guy".

I don't know how to relate to the teenage ballers.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=qI0dCVwdedE

I have that album bitch.

"And it went a little something like this"

That's ADIDAS for you.

There's a reason that ballers hate that shit.

You feel me, Knockout?


[smilie=hahaha.gif] LOL.

Glenn, you are seriously a moron. Yeah, that's what I said. That's exactly the point I was making. You either can't read or you're an idiot.

Tre by knockout.

This is an interesting thread. Allow me my two cents:

I go to the University where Phil Knight got his undergraduate degree in business. Phil Knight was a walk-on track athlete whose coach, the late Bill Bowerman, was attempting to pioneer running footwear. His greatest achievement was taking rubber, molding it in waffle irons, and creating light shoes more conducive to better performance. Knight and Bowerman worked out a business deal and, as they say, the rest is truly history...

The university's legacy is, in many ways, Nike's legacy. Without the university, Nike would not likely have existed, and it goes without saying that Phil Knight has been a generous benefactor in giving back to the school that quite literally gave him everything. His reach on campus has been vast, and many say that the school is in Nike's back pocket. The spirit of innovation and marketing brilliance that has come to define Nike has, in many ways, some of them parallel, come to define the university. I disagree with this notion on the principle that the university in and of itself reaches far beyond any athletic realms, and while our school could do much better in the departmental relations as they pertain to academics and athletics, that is also here nor there.

The point brought forth is, does a shoe company matter to a college football team? Yes, yes, a million times yes, and you'd better fucking believe it. Our football team currently plays in a 58,000-seat stadium that provides one of the best fan experiences in the country. (Opposing fans...not so much. But the stadium looks nice and gets really loud.) Phil Knight's fingerprints are on most of the athletic department's areas of interest, but none more so than the uniforms. Our football team has uniforms that are widely considered the best in the nation, and in many ways considered the worst. We are a Nike testing ground. People have written ad nauseum about our uniforms, and if they like or hate them.

You had better believe kids see that. Just this year, we played the University of Washington up in Seattle and wore an all-white uniform: jersey, pants, helmet, socks. The look was raved about up and down. The uniforms themselves mix and match between green, yellow, black and white versions of the helmets, jerseys, pants and socks so much that a football player can go four years without wearing the same uniform combination twice. Mind-blowing. Not to mention, the players PICK which uniform combination they were pre-game.

We had a junior college running back sign with us, in great part because he liked the uniforms. Who did he tell that to? ESPN. That's right, ESPN. He saw us on TV and liked what he saw, particularly in the uniform department.

Let's be honest: uniforms are the first thing people notice about a football team. It's how people distinguish between two teams. Nike, in particular, is very adept at creating uniforms so unique (whether they look good or not is in the eye of the beholder) that people don't just recognize them as a school's uniform, but as a NIKE uniform as well. And what does Nike represent to them? Greatness, innovation, cutting-edge work...the Nike brand is so powerful that it can evoke these one-word mental images and exploit them so well. Not saying Nike uniforms are mind-control, but Nike's marketing branch is the most brilliant of its kind in the world because of efforts such as this.

Which brand of athletic apparel you like has to do with personal preference more than anything. But, when it comes down to who makes Michigan's or MSU's uniforms, does it matter? Yes, yes, YES. It matters. It really does. Is it stupid? Sure, but those who realize that aren't being targeted by Nike. The uniforms are designed to help target the kids who want to play college football. Always have been. Always will be.

How often does Oregon pull in a top 10 recruiting class?

How often does Oregon win championships? Pac-10 or National?

My point is that Oregon is a blip on the top 25. Is your argument that you would be ranked #60 if it weren't for your uniforms? Because I truly do not see Oregon winning anything noteworthy any time soon, in SPITE of uniforms and an amazing campus. Junior college RB's like your uni's. Congrats. 4 star RB's like the winged helmet and a century of tradition which, coincidentally, does not involve prancing around in fairy uniforms. Keep wearing your all white so opposing teams can get them nice and dirty.

Yes, I realize Oregon beat the hell out of Michigan last season. I also realize Oregon was crap without Dennis Dixon. But at least he liked the uniforms.

Strong, Jeth.

I was going to make a similar point, but you made it better.

BUT WE'RE BOTH DADS, SO WHAT DO WE KNOW?

Phil Knight was in the Oregon chapter of my fraternity.

Remember when PNF was emo?

How often does Oregon pull in a top 10 recruiting class?

How often does Oregon win championships? Pac-10 or National?

My point is that Oregon is a blip on the top 25. Is your argument that you would be ranked #60 if it weren't for your uniforms? Because I truly do not see Oregon winning anything noteworthy any time soon, in SPITE of uniforms and an amazing campus. Junior college RB's like your uni's. Congrats. 4 star RB's like the winged helmet and a century of tradition which, coincidentally, does not involve prancing around in fairy uniforms. Keep wearing your all white so opposing teams can get them nice and dirty.

Yes, I realize Oregon beat the hell out of Michigan last season. I also realize Oregon was crap without Dennis Dixon. But at least he liked the uniforms.

1. Oregon's had, I think, one top-10 recruiting class in the last 10 years. But it's not just about Nike or the campus...do you know how many football players the state of Oregon produces? Here's a hint: Oregon and Oregon State combined to sign 3 Oregon kids to letters of intent last year.

2. See, the Pac-10 does that nice little thing where they play everybody, but this leads to a lot of co-conference titleists. I think Oregon has three Pac-10 titles in the past ten years, which is pretty good considering that USC dominates everyone at everything football. The Pac-10 is not to be trifled with.

No national championships, obviously, but you'll still hear many comments on the 1999 team getting robbed.

3. I'm not knocking Michigan's traditions because those are obvious; hell, any historical program automatically has a leg up on a program like Oregon, which barely registered a blip on the radar screen until the 1994 game against Washington at Autzen Stadium. My point is that kids notice this kind of stuff, and regardless of how retarded it may seem (OK, very) it matters. Granted, it's probably going to be different for Michigan, who will never change the basic design of their uniforms like Oregon has, and rightly so; I really never considered that fact and that's probably part of my undoing. But kids these days still develop some brand loyalty.

I also did not get across very well that uniforms will not make the difference between, say, Michigan and Ohio State. Nor should they. But there's an influential factor there.

Kids see Oregon play, listen to the announcers talk about the uniforms, make a mental note, and file it away. That's all I'm saying happens.

4. Oregon was crap without Dennis Dixon...and five other players who suffered ACL injuries. And twelve other players lost with season-ending injuries. But no one cares about those because Oregon's offense put up eye-popping numbers and it started with the quarterback. And no one listens because it's the West Coast, and you fuckers probably think we play with a round ball out here.

You make some good points and some well thought out posts, too.

I just think Oregon is about the worst possible example that you could have picked for why Nike vs. Adidas matters to the University of Michigan, which is what the big debate here was about in the first place.

Oregon's obviously a very unique case.

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee172/tdmaroney39/UM.jpg

This is a much better representation of what the uniforms will look like.

The blue one's look relatively the same. The white one's are just adding that yellow stripe. Not much of a change.

I was hoping they would change the helmet. Nothing special about that stupid thing...

And that fight song? GAY.

You make some good points and some well thought out posts, too.

I just think Oregon is about the worst possible example that you could have picked for why Nike vs. Adidas matters to the University of Michigan, which is what the big debate here was about in the first place.

Oregon's obviously a very unique case.

Thanks, although you're probably right in that my credibility is shot the moment I walk in the door. But hey, I figured it was a worthy discussion.

The blue jerseys look fine; that piping looks retarded. That's one thing all apparel companies NEED to go away from.

You have to go back to 2005 to find the last 5 star recruit Oregon has hauled in - Jonathon Stewart - plucked from the state of Washington when that program UW's program was on life support. Problem is, the uniforms followed it up the next year with a class of 21 recruits - nice size, but when only 1 is a 4 star, 12 are 3 stars, and 8 are 2 or less, you have a difficult time winning games and keeping the momentum going. The two years since have actually been recruited very well at Oregon, ranking 11th and 19th nationally. Not bad.
But I would imagine that if all of this were REALLY that big of a deal, that Nike, the uniforms, Autzen Stadium (while smallish in capacity is one of the greatest stadiums in the country and voted as the #1 most intimidating stadium according to this writer http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?p=1009234 ), Phil Knight and the draw of the track program...

...with all of that, why was the team 7-6 the year after the uniform combinations were introduced?

Meanwhile, USC - which has history but was dead for over a decade - could sign a multi-year deal with British Knights, Airwalk, asics, or New Balance and still manage one of the top 5 recruiting classes every year.

Sure, it matters for a handful of wavering recruits. But for 220 of the top 250 kids, it means nothing.

http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2008/07/large_ADIDAS1_070908.jpg

Ann Arbor area retailers happy with first batch of Adidas-branded Wolverine gear
A year after Adidas became the University of Michigan's official athletic sponsor, retailers have started getting their first shipments of Adidas-produced Wolverines gear.

And so far, they say, they've been pleasantly surprised.

"Any fears we may have had have gone by the wayside," said Doug Horning, co-owner of the M-Den stores, which specialize in selling U-M products. "The quality, so far, has been great, and the lettering has been exactly what we asked for.
"We think the fans will be very pleased with the new product."


Last July, U-M ended a 13-year relationship with Nike and signed an eight-year contract with Adidas.

That new contract - worth an average $7.5 million a year - included a one-time $6.5 million signing bonus. It also has yearly payments of $3.8 million cash, $2.2 million in merchandise and equipment and a guaranteed $600,000 in royalties from retail sales - with the opportunity to receive additional royalties.

That made Adidas the only company that can produce sideline gear for U-M athletes and coaches - and the fans who want to dress like them, Horning said.

"As soon as (fans) see it, they want to buy it. ... They'll say, "I saw Jake Long wearing that shirt on the sidelines. Where can I find it?" Horning said.
Only certain stores can sell the official sideline gear, adding to the exclusive appeal of the apparel. Anxious customers were contacting Moe's Sports Shops, a local retailer that sells the official gear, in the weeks leading up to its first shipment, said Jeremy Gove, assistant manager at Moe's.

"When they saw the quality, everyone settled down," Gove said. "It's actually a little cheaper so people warmed up pretty quickly. We just have to get used to the three stripes as opposed to the swoosh.

"But Adidas has done everything Nike did and then more; they really stepped to the plate."

http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2008/07/medium_ADIDAS2_070908.jpg

Nice, Wizzle.

Thanks for the pics Art and Wiz. The jerseys don't really look that bad in Art's pic, but why TF does Feagin get his jersey represented? That cat's not even on campus yet and he's a wierd 3 star QB.

Wizzle, your pics made me a little uneasy, so I decided to go to the M Den website and buy 120 bucks worth of clearance Nike stuff. If I would have spent 30 more I would have gotten a teddy bear!

By the way, welcome back Art.

mrqJrRvng8w

here ya go

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080714/SPORTS06/307140001

this may sound racist, but I hate the whites

I agree on the white, but I wonder how ballers are going to feel about them?

that's really the only opinion that matters

http://cmsimg.freep.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=C4&Date=20080714&Category=SPORTS06&ArtNo=307140001&Ref=AR&Profile=1054&MaxW=550&MaxH=650&title=0

Wierd stuff from the article-

"There will also be a sticky strip that says Go Blue across the bottom to hold the jersey in the player’s pants."

We put Bo Schembechler’s famous quote ‘Those Who Stay Will Be Champions’ in the hem of the authentic jersey. It’s not just about us just putting a logo on the program. We also have (silicone prints of) the 42 Big Ten championships on the inside of shoulder pad area. We can do everything with the outside of the jersey to uphold the honor and tradition. We’re putting more on the inside.”

Stuff on the inside of the jersey? What's the point? And WTF is a "sticky strip"

Check out the gallery too.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Avis=C4&Dato=20080713&Kategori=SPORTS06&Lopenr=713002&Ref=PH

This "baller" is not feeling it.

The stuff inside the jersey is interesting. Obviously putting a bunch of stuff on the outside would make it look like a cross between soccer and NASCAR, and we don't want that.
I can't say players will think it's bad. They'll either find it cool or irrelevant, but I can't imagine any way it's negative.
I really struggle to find anything legitimately wrong with them, only unnecessary.

Compared to some of the horror stories and other worst case scenario possibilities, this is good. Adidas buying into the tradition and history at Michigan while starting something new.

Now, the dropoff between the authentic and the replica seems substantial. Those replicas look pretty weak compared to the real deal.

Now, the dropoff between the authentic and the replica seems substantial. Those replicas look pretty weak compared to the real deal.

I assume that part is intentional to encourage purchase of the authentics.

clever bastards

The blue replica isn't bad. That white one looks terrible.

Here's that wierd stuff stitched inside the jerseys I was talking about earlier. Turned out kinda cool actually.

http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/football/index.ssf/2008/07/more_photos_of_new_um_football.html

Except you can hardly see the stuff in the shoulder.

That's a tight sig Mood.

About the jerseys, I like the idea that they carry the championships on their shoulders.

bottom hem
http://blog.mlive.com/wolverinesfootball_impact/2008/07/large_adidas%20Michigan%20Authentic%20Jersey%20-%20QUOTE%20IN%20HEM.jpeg

inside shoulder
http://blog.mlive.com/wolverinesfootball_impact/2008/07/large_adidas%20Michigan%20Authentic%20Jersey%20-%20BIG%20TEN%20CHAMPIONSHIPS%20ON%20SHOULDER.jpg

more hem work
http://blog.mlive.com/wolverinesfootball_impact/2008/07/large_adidas%20Michigan%20Authentic%20Jersey%20-%20GO%20BLUE%20IN%20HEM.jpg

stupid yellow stripe
http://blog.mlive.com/wolverinesfootball_impact/2008/07/large_adidas%20Michigan%20Authentic%20Jersey%20-%20STITCHING%20DETAIL.jpg

Hey, do you guys want me to post pictures of the new jersey's?

I like one stop shopping here at WTF.....linking is lazy, Mood

and I didn't check that link until after I posted the pics

I like one stop shopping here at WTF.....linking is lazy, Mood

and I didn't check that link until after I posted the pics

I tried for some one stop action, but it got jicked up for some reason. Wizzle, you have a gift.

And thanks for the love on the sig Fool, I wish I could say I didn't steal it from someone else.

and now it's basketball's turn to show off the new gear

http://www.umhoops.com/uniforms.jpg
http://www.umhoops.com/back.jpg

they are very very white

they are very very white

The team or the Jerseys?

The team or the Jerseys?

beat me to it. I think the players are whiter.

When did Ann Arbor relocate to Utah?

When we lost the season opener in football.

sig

I don't think I can defend this anymore

http://mgoblueshop.com/images/products/large/74_26399.jpg

^Ballin'!

I don't think I can defend this anymore

http://mgoblueshop.com/images/products/large/74_26399.jpg

Brutal, just brutal. I've (easily) stuck to my guns and haven't bought any Adidas gear. You may see me in 2023 with a big "dad guy" gut rocking a faded Mario Manningham jersey t-shirt, with remnants of the swoosh at the top.

Adidas is fucking horrible. I would never rock any of their wear.

Give me the sweatshop sportswear any day of the week.

The irony is that the college threads are the dumbest threads.

The irony is that the college threads are the dumbest threads.

I don't start threads in the NCAA forum.

People really care this much about t-shirts?

^Dad guy

People really care this much about t-shirts?

Jerseys are where it's at. Right, Ux?

Gear typically sucks after a 3-9 season. Ask Duke how cool their football gear is.

The irony is that the college threads are the dumbest threads.

+8

I feel like having a wake for the NCAA forum. I remember once, perhaps 3 years ago, when it was a decent place to discuss recruiting and rivalries. There was plenty of practically-terrordome smack but it was intelligible and interesting.
It's almost unbearable again. And yet, it's like crack. Though I've never tried crack, WOTS is that it's nearly impossible to quit.

Are Michigan's uniforms really going to have the addidas three stripes down the sides this year? I was watching the BT Tour (Michigan's) and the home and away had addidas stripes down the sides of the jerseys. Is this just a practice jersey thing?

If its the real uni, wow I can not wait to hear the traditionalists reaction when those home unis are worn. For those that mocked and made fun, i get that you just don't give a shit about this stuff...but those that thought addidas was a bad idea-this was why.

So stripes aren't ballin'? (Just askin'.......)

The mere fact that he bumped this thread made me lol.

I shoulda probably clarified a long time ago, but in reference to the "Dad guy" phrase before...that was a term Moodini and I always used. It's not making fun of someone with kids, its making fun of the geeky Dads that wear the...well, walmart looking michigan shirts, etc. Less about kids, more about completely losing all sense of what is somewhat cool. You know how your Dad back in the day would wear or do something and you'd look and go, no way am I ever getting to that point. That's the "Dad guy" thing. Glan just post your picture so everyone gets it.

In regards to the uniform, thanks for the answer.