AAU recruiting?

[AubTiger14 0]

Switching to Nike isn't going to automatically turn our basketball program into a winner. But it will lift the "brand" obstacle we are under when it comes to recruiting. Why would you not want this? Maybe you have some reason you don't thinks it's a big deal (which I would probably disagree with), but our basketball program can be under a different sponsorship than football. So someone give one good, factual, and solid reason why it's to our advantage to stick with Under Armour over Nike?

It's all about $$$, and like an article posted earlier said, "Auburn prostituted themselves out to Under Armour". It's high time the prostitute gets a new John.

I'm sure a Nike sponsorship would bring in comparable money. And if not, I would argue that switching to Nike would give us a better chance to improve our team. An improved team that's competing and getting NCAA tourney bids = more tickets solid, more merchandise sold, more TV coverage, so more money.

[tmjiv 0]

Does someone have a list of who the other Non-Nike schools are? That might be interesting?

[AUtrader 0]

Does someone have a list of who the other Non-Nike schools are? That might be interesting?

This is a list I found that is 2 years old but probably close to accurate. As for Under Armour, Notre Dame was added last year I believe. The only other SEC school is South Carolina. Maryland is the only traditional basketball school on the UA list. I don't know if its coincidence or causality but after being a perennial NCAA tourney team including winning it all in 2002, the Terrapins have been to the dance only twice since signing with UA in 2008. I wonder what their fans say about basketball recruiting under UA?

Under Armour

Calgary Dinos

Western Ontario Mustangs

Auburn Tigers

Boston College Eagles

Delaware Blue Hens

Gardner-Webb Runnin' Bulldogs

Hawaii Warriors

Kean University

La Salle Explorers

Maryland Terrapins(*)

McNeese State Cowboys

Nichols College

Minot State Beavers

Northwestern Wildcats

South Carolina Gamecocks

South Florida Bulls

Southern Illinois Salukis

Temple Owls

Texas Tech Red Raiders

Toledo Rockets

Towson Tigers

Truman State Bulldogs

UNC Greensboro Spartans

Utah Utes

Wagner College

Whittier College

Youngstown State Penguins

Jordan

California Golden Bears

Georgetown Hoyas

Marquette Golden Eagles

North Carolina Tar Heels

Adidas

Akron Zips

Arkansas State Red Wolves

Baylor Bears (basketball)

Bowling Green Falcons

Brown Bears

Bucknell Bison

Central Michigan Chippewas

Cincinnati Bearcats

Denver Pioneers

Duquesne Dukes

Durham College

Drake Bulldogs

Eastern Michigan Eagles

FAU Owls

FIU Golden Panthers

Franciscan University of Steubenville

Georgia State Panthers

Grand Valley Lakers

High Point University

Howard Payne University

Indiana Hoosiers

Kansas Jayhawks

Lindenwood Lions[2]

Louisville Cardinals

Jacksonville State Gamecocks

Loyola Marymount Lions

Lyndon State College

Maine Black Bears

Mercer University

Miami (OH)

Michigan Wolverines

Milwaukee Panthers

Mississippi State Bulldogs

Mount Olive College

Nebraska Cornhuskers

Nebraska-Omaha Mavericks

NMSU Aggies

NC State Wolfpack

Northern Illinois Huskies

Northwestern Wildcats (ending in 2012)[3]

Notre Dame Fighting Irish

University of Ontario Institute of Technology Ridgebacks

Saint Mary's Gaels

SIU Edwardsville Cougars

SMU Mustangs

Tennessee Volunteers

Texas A&M Aggies

Troy Trojans

UC Davis Aggies

UCLA Bruins

UIC Flames

ULM Warhawks

UMass Minutemen

Utah Valley Wolverines

Weber State Wildcats

Western Michigan Broncos

Wisconsin Badgers

[mustache eagle 2,412]

I'm not sure a switch from UA would be a big or small help, but our bball program needs all the help it can get.

The AD should pick up the phone, call UA and say we want out of the bball portion of the contract. If they resist then you point out that nike would LOVE a VERY public divorce of auburn from UA in all sports, particularly football.

If UA wants to continue with one of the top 15 programs in college football history, then they let a very poorly thought of AU bball program pick someone else.

Also, it has been long enough with the auburn/kamara/aau restriction. Call the NCAA and tell them we are rekindling that relationship, but we will be very careful and open about that relationship. Heck hasn't that been nearly a decade ago?

Hire Howland. He brings experience and resume. Won't be intimidated and will know the aau landscape with the above changes as an aid. He also is probably looking for a second chance.

Btw, I pray for the day that an auburn bball coach uses their success as auburns bball coach to get themselves a better bball gig.

[keesler 5,928]

I'm not sure a switch from UA would be a big or small help, but our bball program needs all the help it can get.

The AD should pick up the phone, call UA and say we want out of the bball portion of the contract. If they resist then you point out that nike would LOVE a VERY public divorce of auburn from UA in all sports, particularly football.

If UA wants to continue with one of the top 15 programs in college football history, then they let a very poorly thought of AU bball program pick someone else.

Also, it has been long enough with the auburn/kamara/aau restriction. Call the NCAA and tell them we are rekindling that relationship, but we will be very careful and open about that relationship. Heck hasn't that been nearly a decade ago?

Hire Howland. He brings experience and resume. Won't be intimidated and will know the aau landscape with the above changes as an aid. He also is probably looking for a second chance.

Btw, I pray for the day that an auburn bball coach uses their success as auburns bball coach to get themselves a better bball gig.

+1

Would be a great way to get off on the right foot with a new coach - new contract - and lift the Komara ban.

[alexava 6,973]

I am still slow to understand all this. Is it Under Armor or not associating with Kamora that is hindering us? I thought NCAA coaches recruited through hs coaches.

[AU_Tiger_88 417]

Well for Komara, xCTB pissed him off when his kid tried to walk on at AU....from what I have read somewhere...so he blew that one up again...

[AUpocalypse 12]

Well for Komara, xCTB pissed him off when his kid tried to walk on at AU....from what I have read somewhere...so he blew that one up again...

that's not accurate. AU may have, but it wasn't CTB's doing.

[cooltigger21 0]

I think that if the NBA will upgrade the development league like Mark Cuban has talked about, that would neuter AAU as far as players college recruiting. Players that went to college would be more likely to stay and also the hs coach would be able to be a bigger role like they used to.

[CameronCrazy 1,076]

Well for Komara, xCTB pissed him off when his kid tried to walk on at AU....from what I have read somewhere...so he blew that one up again...

This decision was made by our compliance department and not Coach Barbee. Barbee was absolutely pissed because they already had a locker and a jersey for the kid from what I understand. That pretty much put the nail in the coffin in respect to our relationship with Komara.

[Mikey 16,714]

The NCAA has declared Komara to be "A representative of Auburn's athletic interests". It's not AU's decision to keep away from Komara, it's NCAA rules and that decision by the NCAA is permanent. As long as Komara is an AAU coach, we can't recruit at his games or clinics. End of story.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

The NCAA has declared Komara to be "A representative of Auburn's athletic interests". It's not AU's decision to keep away from Komara, it's NCAA rules and that decision by the NCAA is permanent. As long as Komara is an AAU coach, we can't recruit at his games or clinics. End of story.

The ban on recruiting through Komara from the NCAA expired in 2006. The decision not to go through him since then is a self imposed thing by Auburn.

From a 2010 story by Kevin Scarbinsky:

The director of Southeast Elite is Mark Komara, the key figure in Auburn's 2004 NCAA infractions case, and Auburn still won't go through Komara to recruit his program's players.

Never mind that the NCAA ban on Auburn's recruiting contact with Komara ended in 2006.

"It's not that they can't recruit our players," Komara said. "They won't go through me.

"That's perfectly fine with me for any college coaches. I'd rather they go through the high school coaches and the parents.

"I don't want to get involved in any recruiting. I'm 100 percent out of it."

Auburn got hit with NCAA probation six years ago, right after Lebo accepted the job knowing he was about to inherit sanctions not of his making.

The key and controversial issue: The previous Auburn staff's recruiting of two Komara players who signed with other schools. The NCAA Infractions Committee declared Komara a representative of Auburn's athletics interests.

The committee chairman said Komara was the first so-called AAU coach or team sponsor deemed a booster. That ruling didn't seem to fit the evidence, which was a lot of phone calls between Auburn coaches and Komara, the kind of calls college coaches make to AAU coaches all the time.

Still, Auburn self-imposed a ban on recruiting through Komara, and the NCAA extended it to April 26, 2006, the official end of the school's probation.

Auburn has continued that ban to this day.

http://blog.al.com/kevin-scarbinsky/2010/02/scarbinsky_auburn_hoops_still.html

[Mikey 16,714]

The NCAA has declared Komara to be "A representative of Auburn's athletic interests". It's not AU's decision to keep away from Komara, it's NCAA rules and that decision by the NCAA is permanent. As long as Komara is an AAU coach, we can't recruit at his games or clinics. End of story.

The ban on recruiting through Komara from the NCAA expired in 2006. The decision not to go through him since then is a self imposed thing by Auburn.

From a 2010 story by Kevin Scarbinsky:

The director of Southeast Elite is Mark Komara, the key figure in Auburn's 2004 NCAA infractions case, and Auburn still won't go through Komara to recruit his program's players.

Never mind that the NCAA ban on Auburn's recruiting contact with Komara ended in 2006.

"It's not that they can't recruit our players," Komara said. "They won't go through me.

"That's perfectly fine with me for any college coaches. I'd rather they go through the high school coaches and the parents.

"I don't want to get involved in any recruiting. I'm 100 percent out of it."

Auburn got hit with NCAA probation six years ago, right after Lebo accepted the job knowing he was about to inherit sanctions not of his making.

The key and controversial issue: The previous Auburn staff's recruiting of two Komara players who signed with other schools. The NCAA Infractions Committee declared Komara a representative of Auburn's athletics interests.

The committee chairman said Komara was the first so-called AAU coach or team sponsor deemed a booster. That ruling didn't seem to fit the evidence, which was a lot of phone calls between Auburn coaches and Komara, the kind of calls college coaches make to AAU coaches all the time.

Still, Auburn self-imposed a ban on recruiting through Komara, and the NCAA extended it to April 26, 2006, the official end of the school's probation.

Auburn has continued that ban to this day.

http://blog.al.com/k...oops_still.html

Well I was misinformed then. I thought once a booster, always a booster. Will the time come when Kenny Rogers is no longer a booster of MSU?

[alexava 6,973]

Time to take the cuffs off.

[Guest jojo1515]

Now is the time to cut off UA from bball. The argument I hear for keeping UA is based on football and how much they give, etc. There could not be a better time to cut bait. If UA doesnt like it, hasta la vista. With our football program where it is, we could have any sponsor we wanted. If we tell UA that we are going with Nike in bball and they threaten any type of retaliation, I am sure Nike would love to pick up the bill and become our football sponsor as well. We just played for a NC. We will be the odds on favorite to make it there again this coming season (and possibly for several years running). It is a priveledge for UA to have any affilliation with AU, and if they see it any differently, lets let Nike cover any possile lawsuits as part of their new contract wuth AU. My guess, UA wants so badly to be a part of our football team right now that this would go down without too much of a fight.

[CJBas 4]

Here ya go, this pretty much sums it all up:

http://bigbluebagel....t-long-ago.html

gets in detail about halfway through, should clarify your questions.

Thanks for posting that link. It answers a lot of questions I've had about our basketball program. Sounds like a lot of people in Samford Hall need a kick in the butt.

[metafour 4,969]

Now is the time to cut off UA from bball. The argument I hear for keeping UA is based on football and how much they give, etc. There could not be a better time to cut bait. If UA doesnt like it, hasta la vista. With our football program where it is, we could have any sponsor we wanted. If we tell UA that we are going with Nike in bball and they threaten any type of retaliation, I am sure Nike would love to pick up the bill and become our football sponsor as well. We just played for a NC. We will be the odds on favorite to make it there again this coming season (and possibly for several years running). It is a priveledge for UA to have any affilliation with AU, and if they see it any differently, lets let Nike cover any possile lawsuits as part of their new contract wuth AU. My guess, UA wants so badly to be a part of our football team right now that this would go down without too much of a fight.

You are very confused on the business side of things in this regard.

Of course Nike would "take" us. That doesn't mean they would pay us anywhere near what Under Armour does. Playing in a few championships doesn't mean that you can just walk in and demand a blank check. It is about market share, merchandise sales, exposure, nationwide recognition, etc, etc. In many of those aspects Auburn is only an average-at-best brand.

Go look at Notre Dame's new deal with Under Armour. Apart from their undeserved trip to the title game in which they got stomped by Bama, what exactly have they accomplished on the football field in recent history? Not much, but they are right there in the top 2 or 3 in terms of BRAND nationally...which is why they get paid out the ass in these deals. Winning is only a small part of the equation.

[Guest jojo1515]

Now is the time to cut off UA from bball. The argument I hear for keeping UA is based on football and how much they give, etc. There could not be a better time to cut bait. If UA doesnt like it, hasta la vista. With our football program where it is, we could have any sponsor we wanted. If we tell UA that we are going with Nike in bball and they threaten any type of retaliation, I am sure Nike would love to pick up the bill and become our football sponsor as well. We just played for a NC. We will be the odds on favorite to make it there again this coming season (and possibly for several years running). It is a priveledge for UA to have any affilliation with AU, and if they see it any differently, lets let Nike cover any possile lawsuits as part of their new contract wuth AU. My guess, UA wants so badly to be a part of our football team right now that this would go down without too much of a fight.

You are very confused on the business side of things in this regard.

Of course Nike would "take" us. That doesn't mean they would pay us anywhere near what Under Armour does. Playing in a few championships doesn't mean that you can just walk in and demand a blank check. It is about market share, merchandise sales, exposure, nationwide recognition, etc, etc. In many of those aspects Auburn is only an average-at-best brand.

Go look at Notre Dame's new deal with Under Armour. Apart from their undeserved trip to the title game in which they got stomped by Bama, what exactly have they accomplished on the football field in recent history? Not much, but they are right there in the top 2 or 3 in terms of BRAND nationally...which is why they get paid out the ass in these deals. Winning is only a small part of the equation.

I think youre confused by thinking that our exposure and nationwide recognition is average at best. We are already the most shown team on ESPN. AVERAGE AT BEST?? Average would indicate middle of the road....especially average at best....putting us in the middle of 120 teams (or 60th at best say you)....make it to the playoffs this year, as most expect us to, and we are EASILY a top 10 name in football. No way in hell are we average at best. Our brand name recognition should be at an all time high next year. Fortunately, Nike doesnt live in the 70s, which was the last time we were "average at best".

[cooltigger21 0]

I still believe that Auburn can make it work with under armour being the sponsor. If Bruce Pearl is the coach everyone says he is then he can land some very good players and build a program. It may be harder but it can be done. Get with the people who are designing the shoes to come up with a model that the players will want to wear. Lets break the stranglehold. Nike has on things. Lets be the ones to start the revolution.

[AUBourne 425]

I still believe that Auburn can make it work with under armour being the sponsor. If Bruce Pearl is the coach everyone says he is then he can land some very good players and build a program. It may be harder but it can be done. Get with the people who are designing the shoes to come up with a model that the players will want to wear. Lets break the stranglehold. Nike has on things. Lets be the ones to start the revolution.

Under Armor already makes the best shoe they can. They don't hold designs back because they think it will make them to much money. But lets be real. Nike and Addidas schools own the NCAA tourney because of the influence that AAU coaches they pay (sponser) have on recruits. Auburn is not going to change that.

[Guest jojo1515]

I still believe that Auburn can make it work with under armour being the sponsor. If Bruce Pearl is the coach everyone says he is then he can land some very good players and build a program. It may be harder but it can be done. Get with the people who are designing the shoes to come up with a model that the players will want to wear. Lets break the stranglehold. Nike has on things. Lets be the ones to start the revolution.

While I agree in principle, it seems that most people in the know believe that a good coach like BP or anyone else not considered a possible diamond in the rough may not be willing to even coach for an UA school because of the extra challenges. Of course, only a coach himself can validate that thought process, but from everything I've seen, UA will likely cost us many recruits and many coaching candidates. Completely unacceptable IMO. UA has a responsibility to those it sponsors. If it is a main reason they are being held back, there are failing miserably at their end of the contract and must be replaced.

[metafour 4,969]

I think youre confused by thinking that our exposure and nationwide recognition is average at best. We are already the most shown team on ESPN. AVERAGE AT BEST?? Average would indicate middle of the road....especially average at best....putting us in the middle of 120 teams (or 60th at best say you)....make it to the playoffs this year, as most expect us to, and we are EASILY a top 10 name in football. No way in hell are we average at best. Our brand name recognition should be at an all time high next year. Fortunately, Nike doesnt live in the 70s, which was the last time we were "average at best".

When I said "average at best", I wasn't implying a literal statement...I was implying that in many ways Auburn is a regional brand that doesn't have much selling power outside the confines of the South East, which is pretty much the reality. Look at Auburn's "market": Nike already has Bama in Alabama. They have UGA in Georgia. They have UF in Florida. They've got pretty much all the flagship programs in the SE, including LSU in Louisiana. They dont need Auburn to penetrate any of those markets because they already OWN those markets...so why would they pay us a ransom when it doesn't make financial sense for them to do so? The answer is that they wouldn't. The reason why UA pays us so much is because they are a growing company that is trying to PENETRATE these markets...by basis of simple supply/demand we are worth way more to UA than we are to Nike, which is why we get the big bucks from UA.

Go look at some merchandise sales rankings. 6 of the top 10 nationally are from the SEC...all of them are with Nike. Arkansas is one of those 6 and they actually rank ahead of us in merchandise sales....which is what these whole deals pretty much boil down to in the end. South Carolina actually beats us here as well, and they are only 16th.

There is a reason why we are with Under armour and it is because $$$$. Period. There is no better or equal deal out there for us.

[ellitor 33,114]

Here ya go, this pretty much sums it all up:

http://bigbluebagel....t-long-ago.html

gets in detail about halfway through, should clarify your questions.

Thank you that clarifies it. If we can't recruit through Komara because of past NCAA issues then fine. But we need to switch to Nike so we can have more clout when recruiting through other AAU avenues.

The ban now is self imposed but Komara barely plays a factor in AAU any more.

[ellitor 33,114]

The current UA apparel contract runs through May 2016. At that point AU can renegotiate. If AU were to be Nike for basketball and UA for everything else it would cost us a lot of money with UA. One possible solution is AU becoming a Jordan Brand School for basketball in 2016. It's a subsidiary of Nike which would not interfere as much with UA and likely would cost AU less from UA's end.

[AUGoo 2,664]

I want to be more like Bama!

Let's go All In for Nike!

UA Will have no choice but to ramp up with AAU if they wish to be in the Bball market.

We get a strong personality to lead it, like say a Bruce Pearl, we may have a cash cow of our own.