Apparel Chatter Followup: UCLA In (re)Negotiations With Adidas
by Nestor on Feb 17, 2010 3:19 PM PST
in Football
Email
Print
UCLA's contract with Adidas is set to expire this June. We had a massive and spirited discussion here last September concerning who do we want to outfit our Bruins in case UCLA is considering other options besides Adidas which might include a traditional giant such as Nike or upstart company such as Under Armour. We also ran a poll on this topic as 41 percent of BNers indicated their preference for Nike, while 31 percent wanted to stick with Adidas (23 percent voted for Under Armour).
Well it looks like the talks on this subject matter has begun per the Daily Bruin:
At this point, UCLA athletics can only negotiate with adidas. The current agreement gives adidas a 90-day "exclusivity period" during which it can work to renew the deal. The exclusivity period ends April 1.
If the two sides do not reach a deal by that date, and do not agree to extend the period, then UCLA will have the option to talk with other companies. Bruin reps have been rather effusive in praise of the three stripes:
"Adidas has been a very fine partner," Toth said. "Our coaches have been very pleased."
In a separate interview conducted Tuesday, UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero echoed that sentiment.
"We’ve had an excellent relationship with adidas, and we’re doing our due diligence now," Guerrero said. [...]
UCLA basketball coach Ben Howland has a long-standing relationship with adidas. His three head coaching positions have all come from schools sponsored by adidas: Northern Arizona, Pittsburgh (which has since switched to Nike) and UCLA.
"I think adidas has been great (to UCLA basketball)," Howland said. "They have done an outstanding job for our program ... I have a lot of good friends that are in the adidas family."
Some more interesting notes on this story after the jump.
Per the report under the current deal UCLA athletics gets "about $2.5 million in cash and $1.575 million worth of equipment each year." It was a nice package when UCLA signed the deal with Adidas (I think sometime in the late 90s) making it one of the marquee programs along with (at the time) Notre Dame and Tennessee to have a K with the German company. Well then Michigan stepped in with its own mega deal with Adidas:
In many ways the 2007 Michigan-adidas deal altered the landscape of university apparel agreements. It ended a 14-year partnership between Michigan and Nike.
The Michigan-adidas contract itself also includes new features. In addition to an average annual payout of $6.85 million (in cash and equipment), adidas agreed to pay a $6.5 million signing bonus, reportedly the first-ever signing bonus in a sponsorship agreement of this kind. The Michigan contract is also noteworthy for its "most favored university" clause, which stipulates that if adidas signs a more lucrative agreement with a separate school it must revise the Michigan deal so that Michigan receives the same amount.
I think if Adidas is looking to renegotiate our guys should be a little firm (even though they are sounding content in public at least according to DB):
UCLA athletics seems content with the way adidas has promoted the Bruin brand throughout the past decade. Bjork said that in that period, adidas has improved its retail visibility and bolstered its standing among consumers.
The UCLA administrators also said they have consulted with coaches and players and are generally pleased with the quality of adidas products.
I personally like Adidas more than Nike. However, I am not sure Adidas has done a great job of promoting UCLA athletics. I think they could have done much better job of promoting our basketball program when we were making our Final-4 runs and I certainly will expect way more than what they have done for our football program to date, should we make the expected improvements under CRN.
That said I am not sold on Nike either as I am not sure if they will ever give us priority in our own conference placing us well behind Oregon and Southern Cal. So I am still ambivalent about who UCLA ends up signing with. I just hope our guys lock in an agreement that has our athletic department including two major revenue programs well positioned in the coming years.
GO BRUINS.
50 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If Adidas can improve their marketing...
…I’d be on board with re-signing with the German giants. In my personal experience, Adidas makes superior products (I think their shoes are better than Nike, and quite frankly, their style is better, but that’s an opinion thing) to Nike, but has far inferior marketing ability. When it comes to marketing, no one tops the Oregon powerhouse. Phil Knight has built a well-oiled marketing machine, I’ll give him that. I have yet to be go into a Niketown and not find U$C gear. Even in smaller Nike stores, I’ve seen gear for the trOJans and a variety of teams (from a wide range of sports) that rock the Nike brand.
Adidas, in contrast, has done an absolutely terrible job promoting UCLA athletics. Our basketball team (this year not included) has been one of the most dominant programs of late, has more titles and history than other program, etc., yet I have been in countless Adidas stores and cannot find a single damn item relating to UCLA. It’s one of the two “major” UC schools in this state, and yet, the Adidas store in downtown San Francisco is completely bare of UCLA anything. Go up a few blocks to the Niketown and you’re awash in U$C, Cal, and Stanford stuff. What gives?
I think it’s kind of sad that I have an easier time finding soccer kits for Celtic (Glasgow, Scotland) and Chelsea (London, England) (f**k Chelsea BTW) in California than I do UCLA stuff. It’s so bad, I can only really get UCLA stuff when I’m visiting L.A. That’s really weak.
I know Adidas is a German company and over in Europe, soccer is king. The big clubs with the Adidas brand (Liverpool, Chelsea, Bayern Munich, AC Milan, etc.) are obviously important to them, but they need to get in tune with the American market, and in particular, with the California market. There are a lot of UCLA alum in state and not selling UCLA stuff anywhere outside of L.A. seems to be really stupid, both for their bottom line and for UCLA.
If Adidas can pick up their game in promoting UCLA, then I think it’ll be a solid deal and it’s something I think DG needs to raise when meeting with Adidas folks. Our programs don’t need to be their #1 priority nationwide, but they should be pimping Joe Bruin out like crazy in California, at the minimum.
I'm already there
Match was dope. Shame I couldn’t watch it live, but it was a classic. Three away goals going into the second leg at Old Trafford? Got to love those odds.
The kid is world class
His form alone makes England a real favorite in South Africa. United hasn’t even played their best yet and they’re still just behind the Stamford Bridge mercenaries: I like their chances for the double.
Perhaps CBH should spend some time with Fergie and learn a few things about sustaining success. :)
They will get Chelsea
They are just rounding into form right now.
South Africa is going to be fun. I think we will do open threads around team USA.
To Be Fair ...
How can Adidas ever expect to break even trying to sell UCLA gear in the Bay Area? My experience is that the vast majority of Bay Area denizens I’ve met up with have quite a chip on their shoulder when it comes to anything related to Los Angeles – much like our neighbors to the north have with anything related to the USA.
Can't the same be said for U$C?
If that was true, then why would Nike spend so much energy selling U$C gear in Northern California? I think the “NorCal-SoCal rivalry” thing is over-hyped anyway, but your simplistic view of it neglects the fact that there are a lot of UCLA alumni living in Northern California. Whether they are natural NorCal natives who were bright enough to bail on Cal and choose UCLA, or if they’re SoCal folks who went to UCLA and moved north for work, there are a lot of UCLA alum up here.
If Adidas only cared about the bottom line in selling merchandise, explain to me why I can find Chelsea gear in San Francisco? How many Americans give a rat’s ass about soccer? Not that many. When you say Chelsea, most Americans think of Clinton’s kid, not the mercenaries from London. Same with Argentina’s national team’s kit. Why can I find that in San Francisco, but not a UCLA jersey? I think odds are there are more UCLA alums/fans in Northern California than there are Londoners or Argentinians (or is it Argentines?).
I have no explanation for the appeal of $UC gear ...
at least not one we, as Bruins, would ever understand. Perhaps there are comparable numbers of Trogan alums as Bruin alums up your way. Or perhaps a significant number of Raider fans followed their team back to Oakland and remained hitched to the $UC bandwagon they joined when both teams played in the Coliseum. Or perhaps the Nike stores can afford to keep $UC gear on hand, even if it doesn’t sell well, because they can cover their losses with massive profits on Stanford/Cal gear. Tough to say.
As for Euro/SA soccer gear, I think that’s easier. Both of my sons (now young men) were raised on AYSO and they both now closely follow English Premier League, Champions League, and World Cup soccer to the point of getting up at all hours to watch those contests live when they could just as well record them and watch them later. They are huge fans and no doubt perfectly fit the primary demographic the athletic stores sell to.
As for UCLA gear at Bay Area Adidas stores, with UCLA’s most recent success primarily concentrated in basketball and not so much in football, I would have expected to find some Bruin basketball related gear, but not much else. You tell me that is not case and that is somewhat surprising, but not overly much so. Hopefully, that all changes in the next few years when we get back to challenging for PAC-10 championships and re-enter the national championship discussion for both football and basketball.
by snorkeldorf on Feb 17, 2010 10:58 PM PST up reply actions
No presence at Adidas stores anywhere!
Good point on the lack of UCLA exposure in Adidas stores. I have been to two Adidas outlets in southern California in recent weeks and it drives me nuts that they have no UCLA gear.
by Bruin Brander on Feb 18, 2010 8:58 AM PST up reply actions
My big concern is football shoes
Every year our players complain about them, and we have a bevy of foot injuries. I don’t hear the same problems from Oregon and SC. Nike seems to be on the cutting edge of injury-preventing shoe technology, based on stories I’ve read about Kobe (different sport, but the effort and attention sticks out).
That's a good point Nestor
I have continuously heard complaints about Adidas shoes, but it could very well be the turf. Though, I have been competing in Tennis since I was 13 and I had to switch from Adidas to New Balance. So maybe I’m a little bias. For some reason, the shoes would never support all of my toes when I made contact with the ground, and when your sidestepping that is a huge pain in the ass.
On a side note, I have slowly been collecting Under Armour Gear, and I would really love for them to be a contestant for UCLA. They have style, they have the buzz, and I feel like they have an edge especially in Southern California where appeal is everything. I love ALL of their gear, and wear their clothes when I compete and I have nothing but good things to say about them. I am also always confident in having their brand be seen on anything I wear, though I doubt that makes any difference. I feel like Adidas is just bland. Vanilla, and nothing else. I used to scour the internet for UCLA gear, clothes, backpacks, etc. and I never have seen ANYTHING stand out that made me want to instantly buy it.
Can I just add on a side note, I HATE going to stores and seeing 200 $UC items for sale, and a small little section containing 1 UCLA HAT and like 2 T-Shirts. I don’t know whose fault that is but UCLA needs to WAKE UP! You want kids to dream about coming to this school to play sports, give them fun, comfortable, cool looking gear to advertise the University, DUH! Also I go to the Rainbow Factory in Orange County a lot. and even $UC has rainbow sandals, in different varieties. It’s like I can’t escape the Trogan PR machine. And Seeing Ketchup Red and Mustard Yellow trying to be stylish seems like a paradox to me.
Anyway, I really would like to see UCLA come up with its own terms for using Adidas if it renews its contract. The language should contain plenty of situations where Adidas would be required to use UCLA as a flagship institution, commercials, and maybe even some promo stuff. as well as a nice chunk of change. Not to mention we have Championships in every sport, so Adidas is obviously marketing Soccer, Baseball, Tennis, Basketball, Football, etc. All with incredible History and plenty of championships.
Seriously
The Rainbow Factory was pimping the trOJan gear hard. That sucked. UCLA marketing needs to get with it ASAP.
Some good points
I can’t imagine the feeling of watching all the Trogan items for sale. Here it is all Georgetown, UNC, UVa, Duke, Michigan and Notre Dame.
One thing I though I like “bland.” In fact one of the annoying thing about UCLA apparel at Ackerman is it takes a while just to find a simple true blue sweatshirt, hoodie or a t-shirt in four letters. I have been using Adidas cleats for soccer since high school. I have also been using it for jogging/tennis as well. I used to buy Nike stuff every now and then but switched exclusively to everything Adidas when they signed the K with UCLA.
I like their bland apparel because to me it as less tacky minimalist quality to it. I really liked the products they were putting out for Notre Dame. So I thought they’d do the same for UCLA. It seems like our athletes get pretty cool gear. I just wish they did a better job of making them available for all fans. I’d bet they get a big market.
They complain about the turf AND the shoes
I assume their complaints are distinct. You usually can tell turf problems from shoe discomforts. Let’s not forget our shoe problems against Temple, when we apparently were without the proper cleats for that turf, according to CRN. Don’t know if that we mere oversight or poverty of choice in shoe wear. I get the sense that the primary focus of Adidas technology is on European sports, and not football.
Good point re. equipment issues against Temple
It was def. an issue on that ice rink early in the first half (but not for the Owls).
I tend to like Under Armour gear as well...
Now I am nothing more than a 3 x a week gym guy so I don’t know how they measure up in all the sports that they would need to outfit but………I wonder if UCLA can persuade them to provide the desired marketing. Under Armour only has a little more than a handful of schools and no high profile school out west (TT, UT, HI). It would be nice if UCLA could get them to pony up and feature them in their marketing ads. You would think that the potential to be an apparel gold mine is there considering the size of the LA market and appeal of UCLA. Unlike a deal with Nike, where more attention would be paid to OR and SC (thats just in the west), or even Adidas with ND and MI – UCLA could be the flagship for Under Armour.
Free Brandon Wood!
All Day I Dream About Sports
I personally like Adidas better than Nike, but that’s from growing up a soccer player in Europe.
Is it reasonable to assume that UCLA’s contract will approach Michigan’s, in the $6 to $7 million dollar range? That would provide a lot of extra cash to hire great coaches, assistants…or retain coaches…like a certain Norm Chow? I’m sure that had something to do with Michigan being able to hire both Rich Rodriguez and John Beilein. What do you guys think?
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Extra $ for coaches
That should be a def. angle for UCLA admin to pursue. They need to make the case strongly on why Adidas should pay up based on the potential of a resurgent UCLA football program (and re-established UCLA hoops hopefully in couple of seasons).
I don't think they should have to make that case...
UCLA and Champions are synonymous. As far as football goes, every team has its ups and downs, so why should we have to sell them on our potential. Adidas should really be worried about losing us. and I hope they understand the urgency in appeasing the fans who would end up buying the gear as well…
Preaching to the choir brother
But I would hope they better have their arguments and presentation prepared to blow away any counterarguments.
I'm all about UCLA and feel the same way that you do
but I also feel we don’t really deserve that sense of entitlement if we look at what we have done on the field to put UCLA out there to the public. The last time UCLA played in the rosebowl game was in 1999 and we lost. We have to go back 24 years to the last time we played and won the rosebowl game. I am purposely not looking at our cotton bowl victory in 98 because the cotton bowl is not one of the “BCS bowls.” Our football program has potential, but we still have to produce those results. This makes me wonder if adidas is really worried about losing us. We have not been a football powerhouse to make that argument. I’m sure they’ll make a concerted effort to keep us and not lose us to the competition, but I doubt that they are worried about losing us because of our name. just my two cents.
There's also the fact
that the Pac-10’s terrible TV contracts lessens the visibility of whatever brand we sign on with. That would definitely result in a poorer deal for us than we would expect at first blush.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 17, 2010 5:39 PM PST up reply actions
Make them pony up for Pauley
Why don’t we try to tie in the apparel contract to a naming rights to Pauley? If the sportswear company wants to be associated with UCLA, let’s see them go all in – I would think an overall deal for the team athletic wear AND the historic basketball stadium would be a home run. How much more could we get for the “Adidas Pauley Pavilion” or the “Under Armor Pauley Pavilion”?
That would bind us for a lifetime
I’ve never heard of a shoe-sponsored stadium. (Oregon being a very understandable exception.)
Not really a lifetime
Most naming rights deals are for about 5-10 years. Hell, UCLA has already been with Adidas longer than that.
The Yankees had an enormous deal with Adidas that just ended. It splashed the 3 stripe logo everywhere, making Yankee Stadium a virtual Adidas Stadium, but still keeping the iconic name. Maybe something similar can happen in Westwood.
The thing that upsets me
is when you do find UCLA stuff all they have is chris markey and kahlil bell jerseys
Most UCLA gear I have
isn’t even official adidas gear. I get it from Costco, and Kohl’s since all the adidas stores don’t stock them
"I can't believe I ate the whole thing" Homer Simpson
Nike
I like Adidas a lot but the selection is limited and they’ve failed in marketing the UCLA brand IMO.
There is a Chicks Sporting Goods store in Pasadena where I sometimes shop. Everytime I go in there, I remember why I don’t shop there much. They have 2 racks of UCLA gear while there is literally an entire section of suc gear. It isn’t just the size of the section either. Suc has all sorts of products while UCLA’s gear is old and the selection is limited. They are always behind (at least 1 year) on the polo’s that the coaches wear and the FB jersey numbers. Also, consider it your lucky day when you find something in your size. You would think with the Rose Bowl a couple of miles away they would have more merchandise but nope.
We may not be a top dog in Nike’s lineup but I’m pretty confident that they’ll market the school well and come up with creative products. Just go to a site like Eastbay and you’ll see the difference between us: http://www.eastbay.com/searchresults/keyword:ucla+college/?&cm=TnDdCollegeP and suc: http://www.eastbay.com/searchresults/keyword:usc+college/?&cm=TnDdCollegeP
And you can be sure that if UCLA wins, Nike will market the hell out of UCLA. I bet we’ll be seeing some creative commercials featuring Coach, Jackie Robinson, Kareem, etc.
Yikes!
That Eastbay comparison is downright frightening!
For you MBA types
How does UCLA’s position as the only Pac-10 non-Nike school influence this negotiation? I would think it must count for something, especially given the major media market the school is in.
FWIW, I am a fan of the traditional look, but also favor UA apparel for my own athletic needs. Not sure how their basketball shoes perform (do they exist?) compared to Nike and adidas, and you also have to consider the olympic sports who use their equipment as well.
marketing might not be all Adidas's fault
Adidas is surely primarily responsible but I think part of it must be that the UCLA athletic marketing dept is downright terrible. If our marketing folks were at all competent they would be driving for serious marketing commitments from Adidas or whomever we go with.
I was in the licensing business for many years, licensing the rights to make video games based on movies. All of the studios would insist on a specific large marketing spend and would have approval rights over our marketing plans and execution even though we were paying them millions of dollars for the license. I suppose the athletic gear business could be different but I can’t see why off the top of my head.
So in sum…while it would be nice if Adidas just “naturally” did a great job marketing us, I believe it’s up to UCLA to drive the boat here.
by RealisticBruinFan on Feb 17, 2010 6:32 PM PST reply actions
Adidas did a great job with out throwbacks this year!
Now if only we’d stop wearing white cleats…
"We should have a banner up there: the only team to make the tournament without a coach." -- Baron Davis, remembering his "coach" at UCLA
by inhowlandwetrust on Feb 17, 2010 6:52 PM PST via mobile reply actions
What?!
The white cleats are pretty slick in my opinion. Black looks lame with our shade of blue and our white away uniforms. I do agree that the throwbacks were pretty awesome.
Throwback?
They might have done a good job of making them for the team, but did you try looking for them to buy? I coudn’t find it anywhere. My wife told me that she was going to get me one for Christmas, but gave up on looking for it.
I think both companies bring different things to the table
personally i HATE adidas basketball shoes and I think Nike does a much better job of developing shoes (flywire, lighter materials etc) and from a marketing perspective it is not comparable, Nike wins hands down.
Where Adidas has an advantage can be in (and someone correct me if I’m wrong) we are the only Pac10 team that is outfitted with adidas. Cal is sponsored by Jordan and everyone else is Nike if im not mistaken. This allows us to receive the “attention” of Adidas that we might not get as just another pac10 nike school.
Anyways I think we could make great strides in expanding the image of UCLA athletics through Nike, and personally id rather wear a pair of Nikes than Adidas anyday
To clarify
Arizona: Nike
Arizona State: Nike
Cal: Nike (for all sports, but basketball, which is Jordan, a Nike subsidiary)
Oregon: Nike (duh)
Oregon State: Nike
Stanford: Nike
UCLA: Adidas
U$C: Nike
Washington: Nike
Washington State: Russell Athletic
In other words, every Pac-10 team is a Nike school except for us and WSU. We are the sole Adidas brand in conference, which, one would think would lead toward Adidas promoting and marketing UCLA more on the West Coast than they currently do.
wsu has some nike
i am pretty sure that they have nike bball unis now.
by maccabita4life on Feb 17, 2010 10:42 PM PST up reply actions
You're right
Which is weird that football has Russell and basketball has Nike. I wonder if they recently made the switch. In any event. we’re definitely the only Adidas school in the conference.
by Bellerophon on Feb 17, 2010 11:34 PM PST up reply actions
Is "Under Armour"
what a knight wears under the outside metal?
I’m guessing under armour consists of kind-to-the-skin, breathable chain mail, maybe a steel and nylon blend.
for selfish reasons i hope we stay w/ Adidas, and another issue
I have a couple of those athlete backbacks and numerous jackets/shirts/etc. of UCLA Adidas stuff via the marching band. Plus, I really think Adidas has great products for our sporting teams. Remember, they are the main sponsor of FIFA and the NBA, the two organizations with the biggest global appeal as they represent the two most popular sports.
NIKE
The majority of the big-time athletes are Nike (i.e, Kobe, LeBron, Jordan, Carmelo, Adrian Peterson, etc.), which can only help our recruiting. And on a personal note, I’m a big Nike fan myself. Besides, Reggie Bush is an adidas athlete.
by LavinRuinedCollege on Feb 17, 2010 11:52 PM PST reply actions
for me its quite simple..
stay away from NIKE. Their system of dress bogus has completely ruined college basketball jerseys. The stupid holographic print stuff, the tight fitting “rash gaurd” under shirts, parachute shorts with jerseys that look like they are youth small and have no traditional shoulder strap…ugly ugly ugly
also l.r.c. tose guys may have nike sponsorships but adidas outfits the whole NBA. I think the warmups they are doing right now look fantastic.
http://www.finishline.com/images/products/lg7846la24302.jpg
William Doolittle at your service, a.k.a. will do.
Li Ning
As I posted on this thread
http://www.bruinsnation.com/2009/9/24/1053366/adidas-nike-under-armour-other
the Chinese brand Li Ning could very well be the smartest option.
We are UCLA! We have always had uncanny intellect and foresight. We have always been highly progressive, ahead of the curve. A brand like Li Ning would make perfect sense for us. Not only would it make us superstars of the humongous markets in Asia, but they would likely give us preferential treatment (and loads of money) as their star client. They are fresh and hip and would appeal to recruits.
Side note: I was watching the Olympics and saw that the Swedish ski team was wearing Li Ning gear — it looked good in Blue and Gold.
It’s something outside the box of the blah blah Nike, Adidas et al. It’s progressive and revolutionary. It’s UCLA. I say we give it a go.
Easy money and faithless women, red-eye whiskey for the pain...
Since when has our marketing and sports department been known for foresight?
Besides that, I’d rather us not be the guinea pig for some untested company that has no experience on this level. Sounds more like going the KD route for our apparel needs. The ONLY reason to go to them is that we bleed them to death on money. I mean absolutely gouge them. I better see new facilities going up for every sport, including Ryan’s new baseball stadium, all built with Chinese Yuan, if we’re going to stick our necks out for some untested and unproven company.
Quick research has spit this out
They do basketball pretty well it would seem as the sponsor of Spain’s national team and a few NBA players including Baron Davis and Shaq. They seem alright for basketball. They also seem to do well in tennis products. Their track products haven’t been picked up by anyone other than Chinese and Sudanese teams so I’m skeptical, but won’t rule them out for track. Their only soccer work of note is the Chinese League, which is hardly anything to write home about. They have done no work in football whatsoever and there’s nothing I can find about volleyball, golf, baseball, softball or gymnastics. I’m with Ty on this one. They better get a ridiculous sum of money that allows us to buuld what we want, pay our assistants what we need to pay them and buy equipment/apparel for the sports they don’t cover while still sitting in the black.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 18, 2010 10:29 AM PST up reply actions
interesting idea
but i just think its a bit too much of a risk to trust that Li Ning can properly outfit our team with good products that look good and are good performance wise.
The Baron aspect is interesting though, hes been pimping his shoes alot through twitter with a bunch of cool videos of him dribbling around China and New York City.
William Doolittle at your service, a.k.a. will do.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
