Follow-up on UCLA Uniform Debacles: More Datapoints on Why Adidas Not to Blame
by Nestor on Jan 11, 2012 5:00 AM PST
in UCLA Athletics
Email
PrintWell as has been extensively blogged by Bellerophon and others, uniforms have been a recurring theme here at BN, ever since Adidas decided to roll out the TechFit uniforms, which we derided as cheap-looking, child-sized knock-off looking uniforms that were lame on multiple levels, most noticeably with the shortening of our iconic UCLA shoulder stripes to mere dashes on the shoulders.
However, we eventually found out that Adidas wasn't the problem. We found out that they were more than capable of making sleek, cool-looking alternate uniforms that people would love, doing so for Michigan and Notre Dame. In case you missed it, recently there was a report in the Oregonian that Adidas has in fact hooked up UCLA with the richest deal in the conference:
Oregon is rising. Washington is a big dog. But when it comes to multi-sport athletic outfitting and endorsement deals, UCLA is tops in the Pacific-10 Conference.
Adidas gives the Bruins $4.6 million annually in cash, uniforms and other perks, well ahead of Nike's $3.4 million annual gifts to Washington. The Ducks rank third, at $2.8 million annually, despite Nike co-founder and UO alumnus Phil Knight being a fixture at football games.
And things in Westwood are about to get better: UCLA has agreed to a seven-year extension with Adidas that will approach Michigan's unparalleled deal, worth $7.5 million annually, Bruins athletic director Dan Guerrero said.
This is not really a surprise to us. We knew when UCLA resigned its contract with Adidas, the school was going to get paid a decent chunk of change. The question we have is how do we end up with the dismal state of marketing around the UCLA brand despite this kind of contractual deal which reportedly is richest in the conference?
Here are the numbers from the Oregonian:
| Team | Primary deal | Years | Term | Worth in cash and merchandise | Value per year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arizona | Nike | 7 | 2007-14 | $7,927,500 | $1,132,500 |
| ASU | Nike | 6 | 2008-14 | $11,300,000 | $1,883,333 |
| California | Nike*# | 5 | 2002-07 | $1,745,000 | $349,000 |
| Oregon | Nike | 8** | 2010-18 | $22,725,000 | $2,840,625 |
| Oregon State | Nike | 5 | 2006-11 | $3,264,250 | $652,850 |
| Stanford | Nike | private schools not required to release contracts | |||
| UCLA | Adidas | 6** | 2005-11 | $27,412,000 | $4,568,667 |
| USC | Nike | private schools not required to release contracts | |||
| Washington | Nike | 10 | 2009-19 | $34,400,000 | $3,440,000 |
| WSU | Nike | 8 | 2009-17 | $11,700,000 | $1,462,500 |
* expired
** extension
# California's contracts didn't include the value of hundreds of pairs of shoes and other promised apparel
Those numbers provide good justification on why UCLA is sticking with Adidas. However, they do not explain the debacles that have been well chronicled here on BN.
We get that Adidas is a relatively new player in college athletics. Despite that handicap, schools like Michigan and Notre Dame haven't had any issues executing roll out of alternate uniforms with good sense of timing. Yet at UCLA we have seen fail after fail under Guerrero's incompetent leadership with no marketing instincts that preserved UCLA's classic look while also making sincere effort to expand the program's reach.
Could Adidas do a better job of marketing the UCLA brand? Perhaps, they could. However, the real fault here lies with Morgan Center. As discussed before, Guerrero has failed to provide any semblance of competent leadership as our athletic department has done nothing to develop a brand identity around our football program, which has been gutted in last 10+ years. It is not going to matter much what kind of apparel contract our athletic program signs with Adidas or other companies until we see a wholesale regime change at the top of our athletic department. It is past time for Chianti-what's wrong with Spaulding-Dan to go.
GO BRUINS.
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I absolutely hate tech fit
Total eyesore. Ducks uni’s especially at rosebowl are the class of the NCAA. I like what adidas did with wisconsin’s classic unis. Would love to forget tech fit along with the 2011 season.
by Strathmore&Gayley on Jan 11, 2012 6:59 AM PST reply actions
Oregon's Unis
I LOVED their reflective helmets at this year’s Rose Bowl even more than the carbon fiber looking ones they sported in last year’s BCS championship game, which I thought were the best at the time.
Appears that.....
….DG and the administration are weathering the storm and will wait out any anger from the alumni. DG remains and will remain in place.
VC Turteltaub is willing to engage one-on-one but will not engage representatives from BN. Her minions are on BN on a regular basis – reporting back to her. Seems like a lot of effort when the end result is a dismissive message from the administration. She will not answer questions about the damage DG has done to the UCLA brand and the effect on fund-raising or recruitment. She will not provide an answer when we question the worth of DG – one man versus the damage he is doing to UCLA. Their administrative line is that he is doing a great job and that we are simply emotion-fueled alumni that will go away with wins and time. This Adidas deal – they feel – just bolsters their stance. To me – it just shows the administration has a pure lack of knowledge of UCLA athletics/tradition and their head is in the sand when it comes to DG.
They maybe right. Time will tell. I doubt they get as many phone calls or emails for DG’s termination any longer. There have been many discussions about action – but little action has been taken. I am as guilty of this as anyone else mainly because I don’t feel like I have that kind of financial power on my own.It is on us as alumni to implement change. No one else is going to do so. How we go about doing it – passively or actively – is a challenge. Perseverance and visibility with embarrassment of the administration via accountability is critical.
In the meantime – DG pulls in money – says to Block “see what I have done” and gets a pat on the head.
If DG is still around at the time of the UCLA-Cal game
It’s time for a full court press – a flyover, banners, etc. The calls/e-mails don’t seem to be getting through to the bureaucrats.
Dump Dan!
by bruinclassof10 on Jan 11, 2012 10:11 AM PST up reply actions
Agree
All the e-mails and phone call apparently have not been enough.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Jan 11, 2012 10:46 AM PST up reply actions
Why the wall?
I don’t understand why the MC cannot mine lucrative contracts AND cultivate healthy relationships with alumni, students and fans.
We would have advised them not to bastardize the iconic UCLA stripes. We could have offered perspectives on the numeral font, the tech-fits, helmets, the all-white unis. I don’t think it’s being entirely self-serving to think that our input ought to be sought, openly and regularly. I think we could help add to the value of the UCLA brand.
But, no. This administration insists on doing things behind closed doors, in the dark, with no “outside” input. We’re told it’s not our concern; we’re told we don’t understand; we’re told we cannot criticize; we’re told “Trust us.”
We, it seems, are the enemy.
One Minor Mis-statement
Taz-
You most definitely have not been as guilty as anyone else. You have been a role model of proactive steps to encourage regime change.
The fact that DG is still there is no reflection on you. You have been an inspiration. The fault lies with Chancellor Block, who is an enabler with his clear lack of appreciation of the importance of athletics for the UCLA community.
In my experience, if an employee (in this case, DG) is incompetent, you look to his boss (in this case, Chancellor Block) to take action. And if his boss doesn’t take action, then you look to his boss’s boss (in this case, UC President Yudon). Somebody needs to move Block’s needle, and his boss is the most logical person to do so.
None of us has the ability, individually for sure, and apparently collectively as well, to force Block’s hand. So it has to be Yudon. But how we get him to act is beyond me. What a drag.
But again, you have been a role model. Thanks.
I don't believe those stats for a second
If anyone believes that adidas gives UCLA $2 million MORE than Nike gives Oregon, then you’re just a moron.
Is it possible
That Nike’s contribution to Oregon and Phil Knights private contribution are separated?
by 0725brui on Jan 11, 2012 7:47 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Of course Nike is giving Oregon lot more
I am guessing these are baseline contract figures for each schools. However, it is up to UCLA to make sure they optimize their relationship with Adidas and get the most out of it. Clearly that hasn’t happened under the current incompetent regime.
Not necessarily
UCLA has the most sports of any team in the Pac-12 (maybe in the country?). So even though you’re probably right, it’s not that surprising. Mr. Knight does get his very own lab to experiment with…so the money is very likely pouring in…
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I think Harvard has the most in the country - more than 40
Stanford almost certainly has the most in the Pac-12, with 36 to UCLA’s 22.
What?
Why would Nike pay tons of money to get the Ducks contract? Nike KNOWS that Oregon needs Nike a hell of a lot more than Nike needs Oregon. If you think Oregon is going to drop Nike to get a higher paid deal from Adidas anytime soon, well…then what are they?
Phil Knight can then make any donations he wants and take the tax benefits himself.
I suppose it would make sense
if Adidas also gained some rights to sell UCLA gear in Asia.
What about SC and Stanford?
IMO, to represent that UCLA has the richest conference contract is a bit short of the mark. Since we don’t know about the other two, maybe UCLA has the richest contract for the public schools, but how could we (with you-know-who in charge) have garnered a richer deal than the guys across town.. Maybe we have but if so, it might well be a coincidence.
These contracts that come to UCLA via new TV deal and Adidas may be another reason why the administration is not reacting to the uproar over DG and his incompetence. They reason that more revenue is coming in, so those emotional alums will be satisfied when the new HC has winning seasons, and that is enough. My check for $1K or $10K next to the deal that the Morgan Center did with Adidas is pretty small….
Mensgym
They're unlikely to get as much as UCLA
assuming their contracts are in line with top Nike public schools..
Depressing...but most likely true
….DG and the administration are weathering the storm and will wait out any anger from the alumni. DG remains and will remain in place.
All the more reason to amp up the pressure
Her minions are on BN on a regular basis – reporting back to her.
if this is true, and no reason to doubt it given the sudden appearance and disappearance of the True Fan post by BruinVol 1…we should take steps to be more private in some of our planning, if push comes to shove.
an Ad (L.A. Times or Daily Bruin) or Billboard in a very public L.A. space has been brought up, i think it’s a great idea. My suggestion is it read something like “Fire Dan, Hire Rick”
we need to get all Tea Party/Occupy on UCLA Athletics…IMO
"Players with fight never lose a game, they just run out of time"
~ John Wooden
Suggest One Message
By saying who to fire and who to hire, we are suggesting that firing Dan without hiring Rick would be a mistake.
For my money, the most important agenda item is Fire Dan. I would suggest the following-
“Save UCLA Athletics, Remove Dan Guerrero”
I like the idea of making this public. We need to trigger a response from Chancellor Block either (1) why he thinks that DG is doing a good job (at which point DG’s failings could be pointed out as contrary evidence) or (2) confirming that athletics don’t matter to him, and that he therefore hasn’t give much thought to DG’s performance.
I do have the sense that the administration thinks our discontent stems from wins and losses, and that a few wins will make our efforts dissipate. Speaking for myself, the issue is not the wins and losses- it is the flawed decision making from Morgan Center, that goes above and beyond wins and losses.
It would be great if we could engage Chancellor Block in a rational discussion (not heated exchange or confrontation) about DG’s shortcomings. But he doesn’t seem to be interested in said discussion. So the public space idea makes sense to try to get this moved off dead center.
That Fanpost was reaching epic proportions
Our entire frontpage staff was sad to see that VolBruin deleted it. I guess I can’t blame him since no one wants to be a tackling dummy, but what a waste of pure comedic potential.
SURRENDER WHITE . . . .
. . . . . is not part of UCLA’s football tradition. Even my buddy (a USC grad) was pointing that out!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
